Oral averments in deposition of partition having taken place is not discharge of onus of proof by the person alleging partition

The Delhi High Court in Veeru Parshad Gupta vs Jogeshwari Devi RFA 586/2018 on 25.07.2018 laid that oral averments in deposition of partition having taken place is not discharge of onus of proof by the person alleging partition because valuable immovable property cannot be held by Courts to have been lost to a party simply because there is a case set up of an oral partition and supported only by oral averments/depositions.

Issue: 

The trial court decreed the suit for partition filed by the sister against appellant/brother. Partition has been granted giving each of the parties 50% ownership interest in the property bearing no. 219, Block D-71, Foota Road, Prem Nagar II, Opposite Krishna Public School, Kirari, Suleman Nagar, Nangloi, Delhi

Father  of the parties Sh. Rama Shanker died intestate on 13.1.1998. The mother of the parties also has died intestate and consequently the appellant/brother and the respondent/sister being the Class-I legal heirs under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, would each be half owner of the property inherited from their father Sh.Rama Shanker. Appellant/brother however pleaded that between the parties there was an oral partition in the year 2002-03. Trial court has on this defence held that self-serving averments/depositions of oral partition cannot be believed which High Court agreed with.

Held:

Oral averments in deposition of partition having taken place is not discharge of onus of proof because valuable immovable property cannot be held by Courts to have been lost to a party simply because there is a case set up of an oral partition and supported only by oral averments/depositions. Further no steps were taken for for mutation of the property.