Hi, Almost 45 years has passed now she can't file a suit at this belated stage and it will not survive in the eyes of law.

2. Non-members of the society has no right to question the validity of the allotment.

1) if mother had no source of income and was a housewife on demise of father in 1978 daughter can claim share in property

2) it can be her case that house was bought in mother name for benefit of joint family and mother was mere trustee of the property

3) if mother had executed gift deed in favour of one daughter in 1984 she would be owner of property

4) second daughter should have challenged gift deed within period of 3 years of being aware of transfer

5) second daughter has remained silent for period of 32 years and her claim does appear to barred by limitation

6) it is necessary to peruse the averments made in plaint regarding limitation tu advise further

1) what were the terms and conditions of allotment of plot?

2) was there any clause in agreement that allot tee or his family members should not own any house in delhi during said period?

3) if allotment of plot was fraudulently obtained by mother in 1981 society can move court to set aside allotment of plot within period of 3 years of discovery of fraud

4)It is well settled principle of law that fraud vitiates everything and no beneficiary of fraud can plead equitable or legal ground to retain the benefit of fraud.

5)any violation of the bye-law may make the transaction voidable as against the Society and it was for the Society to take appropriate steps for cancellation of the allotment executed by it in favour of the mother in 1981 till date pleading fraud.

6) non member cannot seek setting aside allotment of plot by fraud

7) n Prapul Chandra Mukpalkar & Another Vs. P. Ramachandra Reddy and Another31, the learned Single Judge of delhi high Court held that where membership of a Housing Cooperative Society was managed and obtained by a party fraudulently, and subsequently the said party obtains the transfer of flat under a registered sale deed from the said Society, it is only the society which can question or challenge it. Where the Society did not do anything except join hands with a third party, who challenged the membership and execution of sale deed in favour of a party, the party would still get a valid title under the sale deed and the third party cannot question it. It also held that any violation of the bye-law may make the transaction voidable as against the Society and it was for the Society to take appropriate steps to challenge the alienation as being contrary to its bye-law and the transactions per se cannot be held to be a void transactions to negate the title of the alienee. This decision applies on all fours to this case. So assuming for the sake of argument, without conceding that the Society has some right in the plot in question, only it could have sued the petitioner and none else. But admittedly, it had taken no steps for cancellation of the sale deed executed by it in favour of the petitioner in 1988 till date pleading fraud. So, in a proceeding initiated by 3rd respondent it is not open to the Society to raise the said plea in order to evict the petitioner as it had allowed its remedy to recover the said plot to get time-barred

6) As per Art.59 of the Limitation Act, 1963, a suit to set aside a transaction on the ground that it is vitiated by fraud has to be filed within 3 years from the date when the facts entitling the plaintiff to have it cancelled or set aside or rescinded first became known to plaintiff.in your case society only could have filed case not non member

1. The illegal allotment can be cancelled it is proved through cogent documentary evidence that the allotment was obtained by suppression of material information. Whether the suit is maintainable or not can be ascertained only after a threadbare perusal of the pleadings.

2. Since Delhi HC has ordinary original civil jurisdiction the suit can be filed directly in the HC subject to the pecuniary jurisdiction.

Another daughter has now filed a prayer in the court that since the information had been concealed, the plot allotmemt should be cancelled and in case the allotment is treated as valid, she should be given a share as it was purchased with father's money, the mother being housewife had no source of income. Can the suit be maintained and what is the legal status of the donee in view of the aforesaid. The donor has also died in 2005

The another daughter's suit filed in this regard is not maintainable. She cannot ask for cancellation of the allotment at this stage because it was bought on her mother's name.

The mother's property is her own property by which she can transact in it in any manner she may desire and she may transfer it to anyone of her choice which the other daughter cannot dispute or object for any reason because this becomes the married women's property and as per law the property in the hands of married women shall be her own and absolute property and there is no need to probe into how she got it or whether it was gifted by somebody etc.

Kindly inform whether the validity of membership and subsequent allotment by house building society based in Delhi can be challenged by a non-member after 35 years of allotment. Also inform whether such a suit can be directly filed in Delhi High Court or with RCS under DCS rules

In my opinion this suit is not maintainable as it is almost 35 years after possession of membership by the donee/donor.

If the suit has been numbered by Delhi High court, you may file a rejection of plaint petition over the jurisdictional point of view.

The question isn't about the practicality but about how the same was initiated for filing.