SUIT FOR SEPARATE POSSESSION THROUGH PARTITION (Partition Suit)

IN THE COURT OF LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, RAWALPINDI.

1.         ABC1 S/o XYZ ( Late) R/o House No.1,       St. No.1, Sector 1, Rawalpindi.

2.         DEF2  S/o XYZ (Late) R/o House  No.2, St.No.1, Sector I,  Rawalpindi.               

Plaintiffs…………….

Vs.

1.         GHI3 S/o IJK (Late)

2.         Mst. LMN4 D/o GHI3.

            Both resident of House No.3, ST. No. 3, Satellite Town,             Rawalpindi.

3.         OPQ S/o XYZ (Late) R/o House No. 1 ST , NO . 4 Sector 4,     Rawalpindi.

Defendants…………….

SUIT FOR SEPARATE POSSESSION THROUGH PARTITION, PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND MESNE PROFITS.

Respectfully Sheweth:-

1.         That the predecessor of the parties Mst.  AABBCC wife of defendant no.1, mother of defendant no.2 and real sister of plaintiffs and defendant no.3, was absolute owner in possession of property / shops no.  BD-454 / 8 & 9, situated at Sadar Rawalpindi, vide registered partition deed no.1200 dated 10.12.1990. Registered with Sub Registrar Rawalpindi, copy of the same is Annexed herewith as Annexure-A.

2.         That the said Mst.  AABBCC died on 3.5.2009 and the above said property / shops devolved upon her legal heirs. i.e. the plaintiffs and the defendants to the extent of their respective shares, as per revealing  law and  in accordance with the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Copy of the death certificate of Late  AABBCC is Annexed herewith as Annexure-B

3.         That the above said property / shops which the parties inherited from their predecessor in interest i.e. Mst AABBCC, are jointly owned as the same has not been partitioned by meets and bounds, till today.

            That defendants No.1 & 2 who are the husband & daughter of Mst.  AABBCC respectively, are enjoying all the benefits out of the said shops as one of the shop no.9 is on rent @ monthly rent of Rs.7000/-in which BBDD tenant since long and is running his business under the name and style of “BBDD Electric Store” whereas shop no.8 is locked, however, its verandah has been rented out @ monthly rent of Rs.5000//- since 09.09.2009 to FFGG in which he is running his business of selling “Tyres” and rent of the said premises are being received by the defendants no.1 & 2.

5.         That property  / shops no.  BD-454 / 8 & 9 are in  possession of Defendants No.1 & 2 and they are deriving all benefits from the said property / shops, whereas the plaintiffs and the defendant no. 3 are deprived off and are not being paid even a single penny out of the said monthly rent.

6.         That the said property / shops can receive an income of about 20000/- per month and therefore, the plaintiffs are entitled to mesne profit at the rate of Rs.6,000/- per month with effect from the demise of their real sister Mst  AABBCC till actual partition takes place by meets and bounds.

7.         That the plaintiffs are no more interested in keeping the property / shops in question as joint any longer and the plaintiffs have asked the defendants to partition the property in question, hand over the separate possession of respective shares and also to pay the mesne profit out of the monthly rental income in proportionate to the shares of the plaintiffs, but the defendants are not acceding the genuine and lawful demand / request of the plaintiffs, therefore, the plaintiffs are constrained to file the instant suit to get their  grievances redressed  from this learned court.

           

8.         That the cause of action firstly accrued to the plaintiffs on             03.05.2009, when Mst. AABBCC the predecessor of the parties died and there after a week ago when the defendants refused to accede to the plaintiffs’s request to get the property / shops in question partitioned by meets and bounds and pay the lawful share in the mesne profits to the plaintiffs  and the same is continuing.

9.         That the value of the suit for the purpose of jurisdiction is fixed at Rs.10,00,000/- being the tentative value of the plaintiffs’s shares and the prescribed court fee of Rs. 10/- is affixed on the plaint.

10.       That the cause of action accrued to the plaintiffs at Rawalpindi, where the defendants reside and the property / shops in question are also situate, hence this learned court has the jurisdiction to entertain the suit and adjudicate upon the matter.

It is therefore respectfully prayed that:-

1. A decree for separate possession of the respective shares of the plaintiffs through partition of property / shops no    BD-454 / 8 & 9 situated at Sadar, Rawalpindi.
2. A decree for mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 6,000/- P.M with effect from 03.05.2007 till partition of the property / shops in question by meets and bounds.
3. A decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from alienating / selling, creating any encumbrance  and changing the nature of the suit property / shops in question, in any manner whatsoever pending disposal of the matter, may kindly  be passed in favour of the plaintiffs as against the defendants with costs.

Such other relief in the circumstances may also be granted to the plaintiffs, in the interest of justice and good conscious.

Plaintiffs

                                                                   Through:

 (NAME OF ADVOCATE / LAWYER)

Advocate High Court

VERIFICATION:

Verified on oath at Rawalpindi on this ___ July 2014 that the of contents Para No. 1 to 7are true and correct to the best of our knowledge and belief  and rest of the paras are believed to be correct on the  information received.

Plaintiffs

IN THE COURT OF LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, RAWALPINDI.

ABC1 etc        vs         GHI3 etc.

SUIT FOR SEPARATE POSSESSION THROUGH PARTITION, PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND MESNE PROFITS.

Application under order 39 Rules 1&2 read with Section 151 CPC.

Respectfully Sheweth,

1. That the petitioners have filed the above captioned suit in this Honourable court today, the contents of which may be read as integral part of this petition.

2. That the petitioners have a strong prima facie case and there is every likelihood of his success in the same.

3. That the balance of convenience is also in favour of the petitioners.

4. That if the stay order is not granted in favour of the petitioners, then the petitioners would suffer irreparable loss.

It is therefore, respectfully prayed that temporary injunction may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioners against the respondents, restraining the respondents from alienating / selling, creating any encumbrance and changing the nature of the suit property / shops in question in any manner whatsoever, pending disposal of the main suit, be passed in favour of the petitioners as against the respondents.

.

                                                              Petitioners,

                                   

                                                                  Through:

(NAME OF ADVOATE LAWYER)

Advocate High Court.

IN THE COURT OF LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, RAWALPINDI

ABC1 etc                    Vs.       GHI3 etc

                       

SUIT FOR SEPARATE POSSESSION THROUGH PARTITION,  PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND MESNE PROFITS.

Application under order 39 Rules 1&2 read with Section 151 CPC.

AFFIDAVIT

ABC1 S/o XYZ ( Late) R/o House No.1,       St. No.1, Sector 1, Rawalpindi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of above captioned Application  are  true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been concealed thereto.

DEPONENT_____________

Further verified on oath this day of ____  day of July, 2014 at Rawalpindi that the contents of above said affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been concealed thereto.

DEPONENT_____________