Order 11

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 15
CS SCJ 987/24
Sewa Singh Vs. M/S HIMENVIRO-FUJI SINGAPORE ELEVATORS PVT. LTD. AND
ORS.
15.09.2026
Present : Mr. Madhur Sapra, Ld. Counsel for plaintiff.
Mr. Anuj Kapoor, Ld. Counsel for defendant no.1. (through VC)
Mr. VK Singh, Ld. Counsel for defendants no. 2 to 4 alongwith defendants
no. 2 and 3.
Fresh vakalatnama filed on behalf of defendants no. 2 to 4. Same be
checked and taken on record.
Pleadings are stated to be completed and matter is at the stage of framing of
issues.
During the course of arguments, Ld. Counsel for defendant no.1 has
submitted that no official/representative of defendant no.1 has done any act, in any
manner, thereby stopping access to the lift in question installed at the upper ground and
first floor of the suit property i.e. Property no. E-4/24, Model Town-I (Near Naini Lake),
Delhi 110009.
AR of defendant no.1 shall remain present in person on the NDOH for his
examination by this court, failing which a cost of Rs.10,000/- shall be imposed upon
defendant no.1.
Matter is listed for arguments on the application under Order XII Rule 6
CPC filed by the plaintiff.
During course of arguments, it becomes quite apparent that the issue before
the court is extremely trivial regarding non-payment of lift AMC charges by one party and
thereafter non-access of the lift facility to such party.
-- 1 of 3 --
In the opinion of this court, the controversy can easily be resolved if the
parties who are owners of each floor are asked to pay maintenance charges proportionately
to the defendant no.1 who is the service provider of the lift in question.
Needless to say, AMC shall be issued in the names of owners of each floor
to avoid any further controversy.
Therefore, in order to pass an effective order, it is found necessary a court
notice be issued to the owner of second floor, on filing of PF by the plaintiff. Plaintiff is
directed to file details of such person within a week from today alongwith PF and
thereafter, notice be issued upon such party to appear in person on NDOH.
Ld. Counsel for plaintiff has apprised that plaintiff has also sold the first
floor of the suit property to one Ms. Megha Chugh. Let the details of such person be filed
by the Ld. Counsel for plaintiff during course of the day and thereafter, court notice be
also issued to such person to appear in person on NDOH.
The competent official of defendant no.1 who is authorized to make
undertakings before this court, shall remain present in person on the NDOH.
Needless to say, all owners of each floor shall remain present in person on
the NDOH for an effective order for disposal of the present proceedings.
It also appears that it is an admitted position that defendant no.4 is not the
owner of the property in question and he has only been impleaded as plaintiff has made
allegations against him regarding disconnection of the lift and as he is in possession of the
floor. However, in the opinion of this court, such person/defendant no.4 being admittedly
not the owner of the property in question, is neither necessary nor proper party before this
court. Defendant no.4 is accordingly deleted from the array of parties in exercise of powers
under Order I Rule 10 CPC.
Let the amended memo of parties be filed by the next date of hearing by the
plaintiff.
-- 2 of 3 --
Be adjourned for 10.10.2026.
(Bharat Aggarwal)
JSCC-cum-ASCJ (North)
Rohini Courts, Delhi
15.09.2026
-- 3 of 3 --