Saroj Salkan vs Huma Singh & Ors.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

6 May 2025

Case No.

Civil Appeal No. 6389 of 2025

Result

Dismissed

Bench

Sanjay Karol, Manmohan

Citation

[2025] 6 S.C.R. 210 : 2025 INSC 632

Acts & Sections

CPC Hindu Succession Act, 1956

Issue for consideration

Matter pertains to the correctness of the dismissal of the partition suit u/Ord.XII r.6 CPC by the Single Judge of the High Court based on the admission, and that too on its own motion without an application being filed by the other party.

Headnote

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Ord.XII r.6, Ord.VII r.11 – Judgment on admissions – Suit filed by the appellant u/s.6 of the 1956 Act for partition, injunction and accounts involving five properties, held by the appellant’s father against the legal heirs of appellant’s brother and his sister-respondent no. 6 – Parties previously involved in declaratory suits regarding the properties – After completion of pleadings when the partition suit was listed for framing of issues, the Single Judge passed a decree dismissing the partition suit u/Ord.XII r.6 observing that no cause of action arises – Division Bench upheld the decree – Correctness:

Held: Submission that the Single Judge could have dismissed the suit u/Ord.VII r.11 alone and not u/Ord.XII r.6 and that too without any application being filed by the respondents is untenable in law – Ord.XII r.6 gives a very wide discretion to the Court to pass a judgment at any stage of the suit and that too on its own motion, without any application being filed by any party – Ord. XII r.6 authorises the Court to not only pass a decree regarding admitted claim, but also to dismiss the suit – On facts, the effect of the decrees in the declaratory suits, was that the appellant cannot go behind them in the present proceedings – Respondent no.6-sister estopped from contending that property B is owned by a co-parcenary/HUF of which she is a member – Furthrmore, proviso to sub-section 1 of amended s.6 of the 1956 attracted to the instant case and submission by appellant and respondent no.6 with respect to s. 6 not applicable to the instant case – Also the suit to the extent it challenges ownership of Anand Niketan house is barred by limitation – Order passed by the High Courts upheld – Hindu Succession Act, 1956. [Paras 36-49]

Judgment Manmohan, J 1. Leave granted. 2. The present Appeal has been filed challenging the impugned judgment and final order dated 15th November, 2022 passed by the High Court of Delhi in RFA (OS) No. 51/2016, whereby the Division Bench dismissed the appeal and upheld the Decree dated 5th May, 2016 passed by the learned Single Judge in CS(OS) No. 683/2007 dismissing the partition suit under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC’) with liberty to approach the competent Court at Sonepat, Haryana for partition of land situated in Barota. 3. The subject suit was filed by

View Subscription Plans →