Interim Order 3

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 23
CS SCJ 1205/23
RAMESH BAJAJ Vs. NITIN SAINI
28.05.2024
Present : Sh. A.K. Jha, Ld. Counsel for plaintiff.
Sh. Manish Mathur, Ld. Counsel for both the
defendants alongwith both the defendants.
Reply to the application application under Order 7
Rule 11 CPC has been filed on behalf of plaintiff. Copy supplied.
Plaintiff has also filed replication. Copy supplied.
An application has been filed on behalf of the
defendant under Section 5 Limitation Act for condonation of
delay in filing the written statement. Copy supplied.
Arguments on application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC
heard.
The defendant has sought rejection of the plaintiff on
the ground that the prayer clause 'B' regarding decree of
mandatory injunction to direct the defendants to handover the
security cheque is not maintainable in view of Section 41 (b) and
(d) of Specific Relief Act. Reliance has been placed upon
judgment “M/s. Frose International Ltd. Vs. M/s. Milan
Developers and Builders Pvt. Ltd.”.
Without commenting upon the maintainability of the
reliefs sought in prayer clause A and B, it is noted that since
prayer C is maintainable, the present application under Order 7
Rule 11 CPC cannot be allowed in view of the settled preposition
of law that the plaint cannot be rejected in part. Accordingly,
application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is dismissed.
Contd....P/2
-- 1 of 3 --
- 2 -
Counsel for plaintiff has straightway advanced
arguments on application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for
deletion of defendant no.2.
Arguments heard. Record perused.
Defendant no.2 is stated to be the property dealer who
mediated the agreement between the plaintiff and defendant no.1.
Hence, no cause of action can be said to have arisen against
defendant no.2. In view thereof, defendant no.2 is deleted from
the array of parties.
Plaintiff is directed to file amended memo of parties.
Submission on application for condonation of delay
heard.
Counsel for plaintiff has submitted that he has no
objection if the delay in filing the written statement is condoned.
Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the present application is
allowed. Written statement is taken on record.
Pleadings have already been completed. On the basis of
the pleadings of the parties, the following issues are framed :
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for a decree of
declaration, as prayed for? (OPP).
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for mandatory
injunction, as prayed for? (OPP)
3. Whether the present suit is barred in view of
Section 41 (b) and (d) of Specific Relief Act?
(OPD)
4. Relief.
Contd....P/3
-- 2 of 3 --
- 3 -
No other issues arises or pressed upon by the parties.
List of witnesses be filed by both the parties within 15 days from
today. Evidence by way of affidavit be filed by the plaintiff and
copy of the same be supplied to the opposite party at least 15
days prior to the NDOH.
Put up for PE on 24.10.2024.
(NEHA MITTAL)
JSCC-cum-ASCJ-cum-GJ
North-West, Rohini Courts
Delhi/28.05.2024
-- 3 of 3 --