Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: CS No. : 349/24
Mohd. Khalid Vs. Charu Gupta
28.09.2026
Present: Ms. Mamta, Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff.
Shri Dinkar Tiwari, Ld. Counsel for defendant no. 3
and 8 to 10.
Shri Vivek Kansal, Ld. Counsel for defendant no. 6.
Shri Himanshu Kumar and Shri Ankit Tiwari, Ld.
Counsels for defendant no. 3, 8, 9 and 10.
The defendant no. 4 Shri Om Prakash Nishat and
defendant no. 5 KKD News are served by way of publication in
newspaper “Veer Arjun” dated 15.09.2026.
Hence, defendant no. 4 and 5 are served by way of
publication and let they appear by 2:00 PM today, failing which
they will be deemed to be ex-parte.
At this stage, Ld. Counsel for defendant no. 3 and 8 to
10 seeks to withdraw application U/O 7 Rule 11 CPC in view of
erroneous wording in the prayer clause as he mentions that the
plaint fails to disclose any cause of action against the applicant. Ld.
Counsel for the plaintiff has already replied to this application and it
is submitted that at para no. 7 of this application there is admission
on the part of defendant and claim of the plaintiff and the same
cannot be permitted to be withdrawn. The oral submission as made
by the defendant and claim of plaintiff that their admission or not in
this application is liable to decided by hearing this application and
-- 1 of 2 --
not on withdrawal of the same. On this ground this application is
not allowed to be withdrawn at the stage of proceedings and oral
prayer of the defendant no. 8 to 10 is rejected.
Defendant no. 4 and 5 are yet to mark appearance.
Ld. Counsel for the defendant no. 3 and 8 to 10 first
made oral submission to withdraw his application U/O 7 Rule 11
CPC without moving any proper application in this regard. Now, he
is making oral submission to make amendment on his application
U/O 7 Rule 11 CPC without moving any proper application in this
regard. Such practice is deprecated and he is warned to be careful in
future.
Ld. Counsel for defendant no. 3 and 8 to 10 has pointed
out that the plaintiff has not paid court fees in terms of her
application for extending time to deposit deficient Court fees. Thus
court fees are not paid till date. It is noted that this application was
never pressed by the plaintiff before the present Court and in fact
the summons should not have been requested by the plaintiff on the
defendant. It is noted that suit was filed on 04.06.2024 and till date
the plaintiff has remained silent and not paid the necessary Court
fees. Only 30 days are granted to the plaintiff to deposit the requisite
Court fees.
Put up for compliance on 04.11.2026.
(Joginder Prakash Nahar)
DJ-02, SHD District
KKD/Delhi/28.09.2026
-- 2 of 2 --