In the Court of Sub Judge, Patna
Civil Court Patna
Title Partition Suit No. ________ of 2025
Divya Singh …Plaintiff
Vs.
Ajeet Kumar Singh & Ors. …Defendants
INDEX
S.No. Particulars Page No.
In the Court of Sub Judge , Patna
Civil Court Patna
Title Partition Suit No. ________ of 2025
In the matter of an
Application under Ss.
17 r.w. 26 of the Civil
Procedure Code,1908
And
In the matter of:
Divya Singh, Aged about- 43
years, Male, W/o- Kumar Ajit
Narayan, R/o- M3/38,
SriKrishnapuri, P.O+P.S-
SriKrishnapuri, District- Patna,
Bihar-800001
………...Plaintiff.
VERSUS
1. Ajeet Singh , Male S/o – Late Shivnath Singh, M3/38,
Srikrishnapuri, Boaring Road Patna 800001.
2. Sunil Singh, Male, S/o- Late Shivnath Singh, resident of
M3/38, Srikrishnapuri, Boaring Road Patna 800001.
3. Manju Singh, Female, W/o – Sri Arun Kumar Singh, Resident
of Flat no. 232, Triveni Apartment, Ram Suchitra Mishra Path
East Boaring Canal Road Patna- 800001
4. Priya Singh, Female, W/o – Dr. Rakesh Raj Hans, Flat No. 13,
Gomati Apartment, Kavi Raman Path, East Boaring Canal
Road
5. Madhulika Singh, Female, W/0 – Rajiv Ranjan, Ground Flour
House no. 5, Moti Niwas, Tulsi Path Near Mohan Sweets,
Anandpuri, Boaring Canal Road Patna 800001.
…………….Defendant(s)
SUIT FOR POSSESSION, DECLARATION OF TITLE,
PARTITION BY METES & BOUNDS, PERMANENT AND
MANDATORY INJUNCTION
The above named
plaintiff begs to state as
follows
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
1. That the plaintiff and the Defendants are members of a
Joint Hindu Family. It is submitted that Late Indira Devi
had two son and one daughter namely Ajeet Singh, Sunil
Singh and Manju Singh and thereafter Ajeet Singh has
three daughters namely Priya Singh, Divya Singh and
Madhulika Singh.
2. That Late Indira Devi has three granddaughters i.e. one of
the Plaintiff in this suit, namely Divya Singh. The plaintiff
has one daughter namely Aamya Narayan and one son
Aadvik Narayan who all are minor.
3. That Ajeet Singh is father ,Sunil Singh and Manju Singh i.e.
uncle and aunt of the plaintiff was an educated person
while Ajeet Singh i.e. father of the plaintiff was a simple
man and week and medically ill condition person and later
on 09.01.2010 her wife is also died. However, they both
uncle, aunt of the plaintiff was well of stand stabled by
profession and business with their source of income and
with strong political background.
4. That it is pertinent to mention here that since Plaintiff has
attained his senses, he has seen her Grandmother Late
Indra Devi being the Karta of his joint family. Being head
of the family, she was the person who managed all the
affairs/Management of the entire house including that of
his father and other successors from the joint family
property and income generated thereof. After the demise
of Indra Devi i.e. Since 22.05.2016, Second son of Late
Indra Devi namely Sunil Singh assumed the place of his
brother as a Karta of his family and managed the joint
family property. The same was also accepted and
recognized by rest of the family and therefore he started
handling affairs/management of the entire joint family
property. It is pertinent to mention that all the documents
related to movable/immovable properties, which were in
possession of Late Indra Devi were passed onto the
possession of Sunil Singh.
5. That it is pertinent to mention that the Plaintiff at the age
of 25 moved to her matrimonial home for and remained
there from year till date, there after all the rental income
after death of this grandmother from mentioned premises
taken by his uncle namely Sunil Singh which is
approximately 70,000/- Per month by lease of property to
Om Girls Hostel.
6. That it is submitted that Late Indra Devi is owner of the
land and 3126.50 sq. feet / 2.2972 kathas of land
purchased by plaintiff’s grandmother.
7. That the Defendants has not contributed any sum/money
in purchasing any of the immovable properties. Moreover,
at the time these lands were purchased, also did not have
any source of income. It may be noted that Sunil Singh
being Karta of the family secretly getting all earning and
benefits by said property all the time.
8. That at the time when plaintiff continued asking for her
contributions detail from his earning husband including
the plaintiff. Under the belief that all his contributions are
being utilized towards welfare of joint family property, the
plaintiff kept giving his earning from his salary and other
sources of income including his earnings from in-law’s
side.
9. That on asking of the plaintiff about purchase of land,
Sunil Singh used to say that all the land was purchased in
the joint names of contributing brothers i.e. Ajeet Singh,
plaintiff. The plaintiff took upon his words due to sheer
respect and family values.
10. That it was later in time that plaintiff back to her father’s
house to take care of health namely Ajeet kumar Singh
came to know that while Sunil Singh took whole rental
income from the plaintiff and the other brothers on the
name of renovation of property. However, it came to
plaintiff’s knowledge that he took that whole money and
invested for his personal gains.
11. That it is pertinent to mentioned here that the Plaintiff had
demanded for the photocopy of the above-mentioned land
but Sunil Singh kept avoiding for a long time. Even as of
today, no documents have been given to the plaintiff but
after several year a record found by her father namely
Ajeet Kumar Singh somewhere.
12. That it is pertinent to mention that all the properties
where plaintiff contributed under the belief that benefit is
part of joint family property. However, he was duped by
Karta of the family and was always kept in dark. Even as
of today, he has not been shown any documents related to
investment that was done. Plaintiff later also came to
know that Sunil Singh also using joint property rent
secretly trying to sell make personal gains.
13. That after the demise of Late Indra Devi in the year 2016,
all the d ocuments/papers of lands are in possession of his
son Sunil Singh who is not ready to show those papers in
spite of repetitive requests by the Plaintiff.
14. That moreover, the defendants who are now in possession
of these documents, trying to sell the land as per their
needs and wishes and in total violation of norms of joint
family property. Aggrieved by deeds of the defendants,
the plaintiff made repeated requests to do the partition
and give him his individual share along with his father.
However, no heed was paid to such request of the plaintiff.
It may be noted that any lease agreement are made from
the joint properties as no partition has taken place in the
family despite repeated requests made by the plaintiff.
15. That on repeated demands and plaintiff’s perseverance,
all the defendants have given small portion of area to live
in very miserable condition while keeping the rest of the
land/property of the joint family property. It is however
noted that as per the partition of joint family share, the
plaintiff is entitled to major portion considering his father
as the legal heirs in the family tree. Moreover, the plaintiff
and legal heirs are entitled to their share as per Hindu
family law.
16. That it is repeated that over the years several requests
had been made by the Plaintiff to the Defendants for
partition of the said land. But the defendants are not
willing to do so and always postponed the partition by the
head of the society by means of one evil tactics/means or
the other.
17. That over the years, defendants have used the lands as
per their own desires. Plaintiff in spite of contributing
towards the property, did not have much share of profits
made from the land. Plaintiff came to know that
boundaries of several landholdings have been altered.
18. That the genealogical table of the of the family is given
below of the Plaint.
19. That the details of ancestral properties are given under
schedule-I of the Plaint.
Schedule-I
Patna immovable property details
Mohalla- Srikrishnapuri, Plot no.-30, Srikrishnapuri,
District-Patna
a. Description of land Area 85’_0” + 84’_0” x 37’_0” =
3126.50 sft. / 2.2972 Kathas.
Boundary
b. North: 20 feet Road
c. South: M_3 Flat No. 9
d. East: M_3 Flat No. 37
e. West: M_3 Flat no. 39
20. That the valuable rights of the plaintiff qua the suit
property are involved in the present suit and the
defendants have violated and infringer upon the rights of
the Plaintiff by not giving rights in the Suit Property to
which the Plaintiff is legally entitled to by virtue of being
legal heir and co-owner alongside the defendants and
without informing the Plaintiff or giving Plaintiff his entitled
shares the Defendants are alienating and creating
encumbrances over the Suit Property for their unlawful
gain, unjust enrichment and unlawful loss to the Plaintiff
herein.
21. That the Plaintiff has no equally efficacious remedy
available with him but to approach this Hon'ble Court
since the Defendants have not been coming forward for
partition and giving the plaintiff his share to the plaintiff in
respect of Suit Property.
22. That the value of the suit for the purpose of pecuniary
jurisdiction is valued at Rs. 30,00000,00/- i.e. the total
value of the Suit Property. But the present Suit is being
filed for the purposes of partition and hence, a fixed fee of
Rs.250/- payable and is being paid. The suit is further
valued at Rs.100/- for ad-interim Injunction over which the
ad-valorem Court fees of Rs.20/- is payable and is being
paid.
23.That the Plaintiff prays for the following reliefs:
a) Pass a decree of declaration thereby declaring that
the Plaintiff as owner of 1/3rd share of the land whose
details are given in schedule-I of the plaint, with the
consequential relief of Permanent injunction;
b) Pass a decree of declaration thereby declaring in the
favour of Plaintiff thereby the plaintiff entitled for
1/3rd share of the property whose detains are given in
Schedule-I of the Plaint.
c) Pass a Decree of in terms of compensation money for
the lands details of which have been acquired
secretly and sold by the defendants as given under
Schedule-I of the Plaint.
d) Pass a decree of Possession in favour of Plaintiff and
against the Defendants thereby directing the
Defendants to hand over the Plaintiff the actual
physical and vacant possession with regard to his
share in the Suit Property.
e) Pass a Decree of Permanent Injunction and
Mandatory Injunction in favour of Plaintiff and against
the Defendants, their successors, heirs, assigns,
representative, agents etc. thereby restraining them
from selling, alienating, mortgaging or/and creating
any kind of third party interest in respect of the Suit
Property mentioned in the schedule;
f) Pass a Decree of Permanent Injunction and
Mandatory Injunction in favour of the Plaintiff and
against the Defendants, their successors, heirs,
assigns, representative, agents etc. thereby
restraining them from raising any construction,
alteration or/and modification in respect of suit
property mentioned in the schedule.
g) That cost of Suit to be also awarded to the Plaintiff.
h) Pass any Other relief/order/direction(s) as this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit/just and proper be also
passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the
defendants
AFFIDAVIT
I, Divya Singh, Aged about- 43 years, Female, W/o- Ajit
Singh, R/o- M3/38, Srikrishnapuri, P.O+P.S- Srikrishnapuri,
District-Patna,Bihar-800001, do hereby solemnly affirm and
declare as follows:
1. That I am the plaintiff in the present case and am
competent to swear this affidavit.
2. That I have gone through the accompanying suit for
partition and am fully acquainted with the facts and
circumstances of this case.
3. That the contents of the above suit along with the
affidavit are true and correct to best of my knowledge
and belief.
4. That the particulars given in schedule is best to my
knowledge and information
DEPONENT
I. VERIFICATION
II. Verified at ______________________ on this ______________,
2025 that the contents of para Nos._________ to
__________ of the plaint are true and correct to my
knowledge and those of para Nos. _______ to ________ of
the plaint are true upon the information received and
believed to be correct and last para is relief sought from
this Hon'ble Court.
DEPONENT
