Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: -1-
CS 61/25
RAKESH KUMAR Vs. GOVIND SHARMA
17.11.2025
Present : Sh. Satyapal, Counsel for the plaintiff through VC.
Ms. Chanchal Verma, Proxy counsel (Enrl
No.D-6884/24) for Sh. Ld. Counsel for Sh. Mahesh
Chand, Counsel for both defendants.
As per report of the Ahlmad, reply is not filed.
Vide previous order, both the defendants were given
fifteen days to file reply to the application under Order 12 Rule 6
CPC and another application Order 7 Rule 14 CPC on behalf of
plaintiff. Ld. Proxy counsel for defendants submits that reply
could not be drafted since defendant no.2 was in the family way
and there was termination of her pregnancy in the seventh month
on 05.11.2025. During the pregnancy period also, defendant no.2
was facing complications as she had conceived through IVF. She
further submits that defendant no.1 is husband of defendant no.2
and as both of them are living separately, there is no other
member in the family to take care of defendant no.2. Ld. Proxy
Counsel for defendants seeks another opportunity to file reply to
both the applications on the said ground. Adjournment is
allowed subject to production of medical documents of defendant
no.2 on record on the next date of hearing.
Last and final opportunity is granted to the
defendants for filing reply to the applications under Order 12
-- 1 of 2 --
-2-
Rule 6 CPC and Order 7 Rule 14 CPC within fifteen days after
supplying advance copy to the plaintiff through counsel, failing
which right to file the reply shall be deemed as closed.
Put up for arguments on the pending applications i.e.
application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC on behalf of the
defendant and applications under Order 7 Rule 14 CPC & Order
12 Rule 6 CPC on behalf of the plaintiff as well as admission-
denial of documents and settlement of issues on 22.12.2025.
(SUKHVINDER KAUR)
Principal District & Sessions Judge
North-East District, KKD Delhi/17.11.2025
-- 2 of 2 --