Smt Sunita Kaushik vs Smt. Shiksha Devi & Ors
- Court
- Delhi High Court
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
st
Date of decision: 31 AUGUST, 2026
IN THE MATTER OF:
# CNR No. DLHC015785582018
+ CS(OS) 35/2019 & I.A. 1028/2019, I.A. 9811/2019
SMT SUNITA KAUSHIK .....Plaintiff
Through: Ms. Anuja Sinha, Advocate.
versus
SMT. SHIKSHA DEVI & ORS .....Defendants
Through: Ms. Rupali Sharma, Mr.
Ajay K. Sharma and Mr. Dileep
Pathak Advocates for D-1 to D-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
JUDGMENT
1. The instant Suit is one for partition, possession, declaration and for
permanent injunction in respect of Properties bearing C-125, C Block,
Surajmal Vihar, Delhi School Teacher Colony, Shahdara Delhi-110092,
admeasuring about 173.33 Sq yards build up house up to three floors, and
Agricultural land admeasuring 9 Bigas in Khasra No. 1685, Khata Khatoni
No.-00952 and 000933 at Village- Chhur, Tehsil- Sardhna, District- Meerut,
U.P.
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the brief fact are as follows:
a) The father of the Plaintiff, i.e., Shri Harpal Singh Sharma was the
absolute owner of the two properties ( hereinafter referred to as
“ Properties ”) i.e., Property bearing no. C-125, C Block, Surajmal
Vihar, Delhi School Teacher Colony, Shahdara Delhi-110092,
admeasuring about 173.33 Sq yards build up house up to three floors,
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 35/2019 Page 1 of 11
Signed By:PRATEEK
Signing Date:02.09.2026
11:21:30
and Agricultural land admeasuring 9 Bigas in Khasra No. 1685, Khata
Khatoni No.-00952 and 000933 at Village- Chhur, Tehsil- Sardhna,
District- Meerut, U.P.
b) Shri Harpal Singh died intestate on 23.08.2017 leaving behind the
legal heirs who are the Plaintiff and Defendants in the present Suit.
Plaintiff is the daughter of the Late Shri Harpal Singh Sharma,
Defendant No. 1 is the wife of Late Shri Harpal Singh Sharma,
Defendant No. 2,3 and 4 are sons and daughter of the Late Shri
Harpal Singh Sharma.
c) It is stated that the Plaintiff being a daughter of Late Shri Harpal
th
Singh Sharma is entitled to 1/5 share in the properties. It is further
stated that the Plaintiff had requested the Defendants on various
occasions for partition of properties, however, Defendants denied to
the same.
d) It is further stated that the Defendant No. 2 and 3 fabricated a
Registered Relinquishment deed dated 28.03.2018 registered on
02.04.2018 vide registration no. 2539 in Book no. -1, Vol no. 1414,
page no.-99 to 103, registered with Sub- Registrar -IVb, VivekVihar,
Delhi in favor of Defendant No.1. It is further stated that Defendant
No.2 and 3 further fabricated registered a Will- deed dated 12.09.2018
registered on 13.09.2018 vide registered on 13.09.2018 vide
registration no. 1026, in book no.-3 Vol no. 83, page no. 135 to 138
registered with Sub- Registrar -IVb, VivekVihar, Delhi in favor of
Defendant No.1 for 50% share each in the properties.
e) It is stated that Defendant no. 1 to 3 are attempting to complete the
mutation process qua Agricultural land admeasuring 9 Bigas in
Khasra No. 1685, Khata Khatoni No.-00952 and 000933 at Village-
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 35/2019 Page 2 of 11
Signed By:PRATEEK
Signing Date:02.09.2026
11:21:30
Chhur, Tehsil- Sardhna, District- Meerut, U.P in their favour to usurp
the legal rights of the Plaintiff. It is further stated that Defendant No.2
in connivance with Defendant No. 1 and 3 are attempting to create
third party rights in one of the properties i.e., Property bearing no. C-
125, C Block, Surajmal Vihar, Delhi School Teacher Colony,
Shahdara Delhi-110092, admeasuring about 173.33 Sq yards build up
house up to three floors for which the Plaintiff had also filed a police
complaint. Therefore, the Plaintiff has filed the present Suit inter alia
seeking partition of the properties by metes and bounds.
3. Summons in the present Suit were issued on 23.01.2019. Issues are
yet to be framed.
4. It is contended by learned Counsel for Defendants No.1 to 3 that the
relief for partition of agricultural land admeasuring 9 Bigas in Khasra No.
1685, Khata Khatoni No.-00952 and 000933 at Village- Chhur, Tehsil-
Sardhna, District- Meerut, U.P., cannot be granted by this Court in view of
Section 206 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006. It is contended that
the general order of succession for any agricultural land is governed by
Section 108 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006. It is stated that the
property can only succeed on the basis of Section 108 of the Uttar Pradesh
Revenue Code. It is further contended that Section 206 of the Uttar Pradesh
Revenue Code bars the jurisdiction of civil and revenue courts to pass any
order on any matter which is governed by Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code.
5. Heard learned Counsels for the parties and perused material on
record.
6. For adjudication of the present Suit qua agricultural property, it is
apposite to reproduce Section 108, 206 and Schedule II of Uttar Pradesh
Revenue Code, 2006.
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 35/2019 Page 3 of 11
Signed By:PRATEEK
Signing Date:02.09.2026
11:21:30
“ 108. General order of succession to male
bhumidhar, asami or government lessee.-
(1) Subject to the provisions of section 107, where a
bhumidhar, asami or government lessee, being a male
'[ third gender] dies, his interest in his holding shall
devolve upon his heirs being the relatives specified in
sub-section (2) in accordance with the following
principles, namely:-
(i) the heirs specified in any one clause of sub-section
(2) shall take simultaneously in equal shares;
(ii) the heirs specified in any preceding clause of sub-
section (2) shall take to the exclusion of all heirs
specified in succeeding clauses, that is to say, those in
clause (a) shall be preferred to those in clause (b),
those in clause (b) shall be preferred to those in clause
(c) and so on, in succession; (iii) if there are more
widows than one, of the bhumidhar, asami or
government lessee, or of any predeceased male lineal
descendant, who would have been an heir, if alive, all
such widows together shall take one share;
(iv) the widow or widowed mother or the father’s
widowed mother or the widow of any predeceased male
lineal descendant who would have been an heir, if
alive, shall inherit only if she has not remarried.
[(2)] The following relatives of the male third gender
Bhumidhar, asami or government lessee are heirs
subject to the provisions of sub section (1), namely:
(a) Widow, or third gender spouse, unmarried
daughters, third gender issue and the male lineal
descendants in the male line of descent per stirpes:
Provided that the widow, unmarried daughters, third
gender issue and sons howsoever shall inherit per
stirpes the share which would have devolved upon the
predeceased son had he been alive;
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 35/2019 Page 4 of 11
Signed By:PRATEEK
Signing Date:02.09.2026
11:21:30
(b) Mother and father;
(c) Married daughter;
(d) Brother, unmarried sister, third gender sibling
being respectively the son and daughter, third gender
issue of the same father as the deceased, and son,
unmarried daughter, third gender issue of predeceased
brother, the predeceased brother, having been the son
of the same father as the deceased.
(e) Son's daughter and third gender issue;
(f) Father's mother and father's father;
(g) Daughter's son, third gender issue and unmarried
daughter;
(h) Married sister;
(i) Half sister, being the daughter of the same father as
the deceased;
(j) Sister's son, third gender issue and unmarried
daughter;
(k) Half sister's son, third gender issue and unmarried
daughter the sister having been the daughter of the
same father as the deceased;
(l) Brother's son's son, third gender issue and
unmarried daughter;
(m) Father's father's son, third gender issue and
unmarried daughter;
(n) Father's father's son's son, third gender issue and
unmarried daughter;
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 35/2019 Page 5 of 11
Signed By:PRATEEK
Signing Date:02.09.2026
11:21:30
(o)Mother's mother's son, third gender issue and
unmarried daughter.
xxx
206. Jurisdiction of civil Courts and revenue courts. -
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for
the time being in force, but subject to the provisions of
this Code, no Civil Court shall entertain any suit,
application or proceeding to obtain a decision or order
on any matter which the State Government, the Board,
any Revenue Court or revenue Officer is, by or under
this Code, empowered to determine, decide or dispose
of.
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the
provisions of sub-section (1), and save as otherwise
expressly provided by or under this Code-
(a) no Civil Court shall exercise jurisdiction over any
of the matters specified in the Second Schedule; and
(b) no Court other than the revenue Court or the
revenue officer specified in column 3 of the Third
Schedule shall entertain any suit, application or
proceeding specified in column 2 thereof.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Code,
an objection that a Court or officer mentioned in sub-
section (2)(b) had or had no jurisdiction with respect
to any suit, application or proceeding, shall not be
entertained by any appellate, revisional or executing
Court, unless the objection was taken before the Court
or officer of the first instance, at the earliest
opportunity, and in all cases where issues are settled at
or before such settlement, and unless there has been a
consequent failure of justice.
xxx
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 35/2019 Page 6 of 11
Signed By:PRATEEK
Signing Date:02.09.2026
11:21:30
1. Any question regarding the determination of
boundaries or fixing of boundary marks.
2. Any claim to question a decision determining abadi
made by the Collector.
3. Any claim to have any entry made in any revenue
records or to have any such entry omitted, amended or
substituted.
4. Any question regarding the assessment, remission or
suspension of land revenue or rent.
5. Any claim connected with or arising out of the
collection by the State Government or the enforcement
by such Government of any process for the recovery of
land revenue or any sum recoverable as an arrear of
land revenue under this Code or any other law for the
time being in force.
6. Any claim against the vesting of any property in the
State Government, Gram Panchayat or other local
authority under this Code.
7. Any question relating to the levy or imposition of the
fine, cost, expense, charge, penalty or compensation
under this Code.
8. Any question regarding reinstatement of a
bhumidhar or asami wrongfully ejected or
dispossessed from any land.
9. Any claim to compel the performance of any duty
imposed by this Code on any revenue officer appointed
under this Code.
10. Any question, relating to division, creation,
amalgamation, abolition or readjustment of revenue
areas and Lekhpal’s circles under Chapter II.
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 35/2019 Page 7 of 11
Signed By:PRATEEK
Signing Date:02.09.2026
11:21:30
11. Any question relating to the allotment of land
referred to in section 64 or section 125 or cancellation
of such allotment.
12. Any claim to question a direction issued by the
Collector under section 71.
13. Any claim to question the delivery of possession
over any land and part thereof referred to in section
124, or the eviction of any person under section 134 or
section 201.
14. Any claim to question the validity of any order
made by the State Government under Chapter XI.
15. Any claim regarding possession over any land.
16. Any claim to establish the rights of a co-tenure
holder in respect of any land.”
7. The instant Suit is one for partition. The Plaintiff is claiming partition
on the ground that the father of the Plaintiff was the absolute owner of the
suit properties and on his demise, the properties are available for partition.
More particularly, the land admeasuring 9 Bigas in Khasra No. 1685, Khata
Khatoni No.-00952 and 000933 at Village- Chhur, Tehsil- Sardhna, District-
Meerut, U.P. is an agricultural land and there is no dispute from both sides
that the land is governed by the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006.
8. In view of the fact that there is no dispute that the property
admeasuring 9 Bigas in Khasra No. 1685, Khata Khatoni No.-00952 and
000933 at Village- Chhur, Tehsil- Sardhna, District- Meerut, U.P. is an
agricultural land, this Court is of the opinion that this Court will not have the
jurisdiction to entertain any relief for partition of the said property in view of
Section 108 read with Section 206 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code.
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 35/2019 Page 8 of 11
Signed By:PRATEEK
Signing Date:02.09.2026
11:21:30
9. Though no formal application under Order XII Rule 6 has been filed
in the present Suit, it is well settled that for passing a judgment under Order
XII Rule 6 of the CPC, it is not necessary that there has to be an application.
Order XII Rule 6 reads as under:
“Order XII Rule 6: Judgment on admissions.— (1)
Where admissions of fact have been made either in the
pleading or otherwise; whether orally or in writing, the
Court may at any stage of the suit, either on the
application of any party or of its own motion and
without waiting for the determination of any other
question between the parties, make such order or give
such judgment as it may think fit, having regard to
such admissions.
(2) Whenever a judgment is pronounced under sub-rule
(1) a decree shall be drawn up in accordance with the
judgment and the decree shall bear the date on which
the judgment was pronounced.”
10. It is pertinent to mention that in addition to Section 108 of the Uttar
Pradesh Revenue Code, Section 116 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code also
provides division of holding of which a person is a co-sharer. Section 116 of
the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 reads as under:-
“ 116. Suit for division of holding.
(1)A bhumidhar may sue for the division of the holding
of which he is a co-sharer.
(2) [In every such suit, the Court may also divide the
trees, wells and other improvements existing on such
holding but where such division is not possible, the
trees, wells and other improvements aforesaid and
valuation thereof shall be divided and adjusted in the
manner prescribed.]
(3)One suit may be instituted for the division of more
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 35/2019 Page 9 of 11
Signed By:PRATEEK
Signing Date:02.09.2026
11:21:30
holdings than one where all the parties to the suit other
than the [Gram Panchayat] are, jointly interested in
each of the holdings.
(4)To every suit under this section, the [Gram
Panchayat] concerned shall be made a party.”
11. Plaintiff by way of the present Suit is seeking partition of a land
situated in Uttar Pradesh. However, the same is a subject matter of Uttar
Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006. The purpose of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code,
2006 as stated in the Code itself is to consolidate and amend laws related to
land tenures and land revenue in State of Uttar Pradesh and further governs
matters related to such land tenures and revenue.
12. A perusal of Section 206 of the said Code shows that the Code bars
civil courts to exercise jurisdiction over any matters as specified in Second
Schedule. Specifically, Entry 15 and 16 of the Second Schedule of Uttar
Pradesh Revenue Code shows that any claim qua possession of any land or
any claim for establishing rights of a co- tenure holder in respect of any land
cannot be entertained by Civil Court.
13. Moreover, the Third Schedule of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
specifically provides that any suit for division of holding has to be first
adjudicated Sub-Divisional Officer, who has the original jurisdiction under
the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code and the appeal thereto lies before the
Commissioner and the second appeal lies before the Board of Revenue. This
Court is therefore of the opinion that any which way and more particularly
in terms of bar under Section 206 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006
to entertain any suit, application or proceedings which are covered by the
Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, this Court will not have the jurisdiction to
entertain the present Suit qua property admeasuring 9 Bigas in Khasra No.
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 35/2019 Page 10 of 11
Signed By:PRATEEK
Signing Date:02.09.2026
11:21:30
1685, Khata Khatoni No.-00952 and 000933 at Village- Chhur, Tehsil-
Sardhna, District- Meerut, U.P.
14. The Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code is a self contained Code having its
own hierarchy of Appellate Courts. Section 206 of the Uttar Pradesh
Revenue Code acts as a complete bar for the matters which are covered
under the Second Schedule of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code. The present
Suit is one for partition. Section 108 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
gives the general order of succession to a male bhumidar, asami or
government lessee and Section 116 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
gives the remedy of filing a suit for division of holding. This Court therefore
does not have the jurisdiction to entertain the Suit for partition in respect of
a property which will be governed by the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code
which is a special statute.
15. The Suit is dismissed in respect of the reliefs sought qua property
being agricultural land admeasuring 9 Bigas in Khasra No. 1685, Khata
Khatoni No.-00952 and 000933 at Village- Chhur, Tehsil- Sardhna, District-
Meerut, U.P. with liberty to the Plaintiff to approach the competent authority
and take the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act in accordance with
law.
16. The Suit shall continue so far as the other property is concerned.
17. List on 27.10.2026 for framing of issues.
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J
AUGUST 31, 2026
hsk/kg
Signature Not Verified
CS(OS) 35/2019 Page 11 of 11
Signed By:PRATEEK
Signing Date:02.09.2026
11:21:30