Order 21

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Civ suit 564/24 Indu Sharma Vs. Imran Farooqui Page No. 1/3
15 Civ Suit 564/24
INDU SHARMA Vs. MOHD IMRAN FAROOQUI
16.04.2026
Present: None for the plaintiff.
Mohd. Danish, Ld. Counsel for the defendant.
Put up for orders at 04:00 PM.
Pranat Kumar Joshi
ACJ-cum-ARC-cum-CCJ
North-East/Karkardooma Courts,
Delhi/16.04.2026
At 04:00 PM
Present: None.
Order on application under Order XII Rule 6 CPC
1. The instant application is filed under Order XII Rule 6 Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter ‘CPC’) by the Plaintiff.
2. The Plaintiff would contend that the defendant has admitted the
relationship of landlord and tenant in the instant suit which is filed
for possession. Ld. Counsel for Plaintiff would further contend that
the instant suit is not filed under Delhi Rent Control Act.
3. Thus, Ld. Counsel for Plaintiff would contend that the instant suit
must be decreed on the basis of admission of the Defendant alone.
4. Per Contra, the Defendant assails the instant application on the
grounds that no admission whatsoever has been made by him in the
written statement.
-- 1 of 3 --
Civ suit 564/24 Indu Sharma Vs. Imran Farooqui Page No. 2/3
5. Ld. Counsel for Defendant would further contend that they have
categorically denied the relationship of landlord and tenant between
them.
6. Ld. Counsel for the defendant would further contend that address of
the suit property mentioned in the plaint is entirely different from the
one occupied by the Defendant.
Analysis and Findings
7. Before venturing to decide the application on merits, understanding
the law relating to admissions under Order XII Rule 6 CPC is
pertinent.
8. The provision under consideration has been carved to enable the
court to pronounce the judgment on admission when the admissions
are sufficient to entitle the plaintiff to get the decree inasmuch as the
provision is enacted to render speedy judgments and save the parties
from going through the rigmarole of a protracted trial. Courts have
jurisdiction to enter a judgment and to pass a decree on admitted
claim. The object is to obtain a speedy judgment at least to the extent
of the relief to which according to the admission of the defendant,
the plaintiff is entitled.1
9. However, this court cannot lose sight of the fact that relief under
Order XII Rule 6 CPC is purely discretionary. This is clear from the
use of word “may” in the provision. The Court may choose to
decline passing relief under this provision if it is felt that it may not
be safe to do so. 2
1 Uttam Singh Duggal & Co. Ltd. v. United Bank of India, AIR 2000 SC 2740
2 Rajiv Ghosh v. Satya Narayan Jaiswal, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 751.
-- 2 of 3 --
Civ suit 564/24 Indu Sharma Vs. Imran Farooqui Page No. 3/3
10. In the instant matter, the admission of landlord and tenant
relationship between the parties is neither clear from the pleadings
nor from any other circumstances. Further, there is the issue of
identity of suit property which requires adjudication. In the
contemplation of this Court, these issues require proof by leading
cogent evidence.
11.Thus, for the reason mentioned above, I am not inclined to grant the
relief under Order XII Rule 6 CPC. The application is accordingly
disposed as dismissed. No order as to costs.
12.Let the matter be listed for further proceedings on 21.05.2026.
Pranat Kumar Joshi
ACJ-cum-ARC-cum-CCJ
North-East/Karkardooma Courts,
Delhi/16.04.2026
-- 3 of 3 --