Order 3

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: -1-
9 Civ Suit 122/26
Kavita Devi Vs. Billu Kumar
12.05.2026
Present: Ms. Kanika, Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff alongwith
plaintiff.
Sh. Amit Rathore, Ld. Counsel for defendant no. 1,
2 and 3.
Ms. Pramiti Sharma, Ld. Proxy counsel for
defendant no. 4/BSES through V/C.
Matter has been received back unsettled from the
Mediation Cell.
Replication / rejoinder to the WS and reply to
application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC of defendant no.
4/BSES has been filed by the plaintiff. Taken on record. Copy be
supplied, if not already supplied.
Also, an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC has
been filed by the plaintiff. Taken on record. Copy supplied.
Ld. Counsel for defendant no. 1, 2, and 3 points out
that even in the amended plaint sought to be filed, there is no cause
of action paragraph. Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff fairly concedes
that certain deficiencies remain present in the application as well as
in the amended plaint sought to be filed and seeks liberty to
withdraw the present application with permission to file a fresh
application. It is submitted that the fresh application shall be filed
today itself by 2:00 pm.
In view of the above, the present application stands
disposed of as withdrawn.
At request, be put up at 2:00 pm for filing of fresh
application.
(Dr. Saema Jain)
JSCC-cum-ASCJ-cum-Guardian Judge
East/KKD Courts/Delhi
12.05.2026
-- 1 of 3 --
-2-
At 2:20 pm
Present: Ms. Kanika, Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff alongwith
plaintiff.
Sh. Amit Rathore, Ld. Counsel for defendant no. 1,
2 and 3.
Ms. Meghna Nimbekar, Ld. Counsel for defendant
no. 4/BSES.
Fresh application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC has
been filed on behalf of the plaintiff. Taken on record. Copy be
supplied.
The defendants are directed to file reply, if any, to the
application with advance copy to the plaintiff at least a week prior
to the NDOH.
WS alongwith reply to application under Order 39
Rule 1 and 2 CPC and application seeking condonation of delay has
also been filed on behalf of defendant no. 4/BSES. Copy supplied.
Arguments have been heard on the condonation of
delay application. Record has been perused.
In view of the reasons mentioned in the application,
sufficient cause is made out. Accordingly, the delay in filing the
WS stands condoned and the same is taken on record.
At this stage, ld. Counsel for the plaintiff presses her
application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC stating that the
plaintiff is suffering extreme hardship and inconvenience,
particularly in the prevailing weather conditions in Delhi due to
absence of electricity connection in the suit property. Per contra, ld.
Counsel for defendant no. 1, 2 and 3 contends that the application
may only be taken up for consideration after the pleadings attain
clarity upon adjudication of the application under Order 6 Rule 17
CPC. It is further submitted that he has no objection if a short date
is given to ensure that no undue prejudice is caused to the plaintiff.
-- 2 of 3 --
-3-
In view of the above submissions, be put up for
arguments on the application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC / further
proceedings on 13.05.2026 at 2:00 pm.
(Dr. Saema Jain)
JSCC-cum-ASCJ-cum-Guardian Judge
East/KKD Courts/Delhi
12.05.2026
-- 3 of 3 --