Interim Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: -1-
19 CS 362/24
Smt Laxmi Vs. Sh Vijay Kumar and ors.
14.07.2025
(Regular second PA is on leave today.)
Present : Sh. S.A. Imran, Ld. Counsel for Plaintiff.
Sh. Charan Jeet, Sh. Shabab Ali and Ms. Shashi Bala, Ld.
Counsel for Defendant no.1 with Defendant no. 1.
Smt. Shashi Bala, Ld. LAC for defendant no. 2.
None for Defendant no. 3
(already exparte vide Order dated
03.04.2025.)
Proposed Defendant no. 4 person.
Unsettled report received from the Mediation center.
A. Ld. Counsel for Plaintiff submits that earlier he has filed
an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, however, inadvertently the
complete facts were not mentioned therein and further, details of
proposed defendant were not menteioned therein. Ld. counsel thus
submits that earlier application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC may be
disposed off and fresh appilcation may be considered.
In view of aforesaid submissions, the earlier application
under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC dated 28.03.2025 is disposed off as having
withdrawn.
B. Perusal of record shows that in between, Planitiff has filed
application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleadment of Sh. Sunil
Kumar, Ms. Nisha and Ms. Manisha (all children of late Sh. Rajender
Singh) as ‘Defendant no. 4 to 6’ respectively along with proposed
amended memo of parties.
-- 1 of 3 --
-2-
Proposed Defendant no. 4 submits that proposed
Defendant no. 5 and 6 are his sisters. He further submits that he has no
objection if they are impleaded as necessary party.
Arguments heard on application under Order 1 Rule 10
CPC dated 08.04.2025. The present suit has been filed for partition of
the suit property.
It is submitted that proposed Defendants no. 4 to 6 are the
sons of Smt. Vimla Devi/Defendant no. 2. It is further submitted that
Defendant no. 2 is wife of late Sh. Rajender Singh& proposed
defendants no. 4 to 6 are children of late Sh. Rajender Singh. It is
further submitted that late Sh. Rajender Singh is the real brother of
Plaintiffs and Defendant no. 1 and 3. As such, proposed defendants are
the necessary parties.
I have perused the record.
For the reasons stated in the application, the aforesaid
application is disposed off as allowed and Sh. Sunil Kumar, Ms. Nisha
and Ms. Manisha are impleaded on record as ‘Defendant no. 4 to 6’
respectively. Amended memo of parties is taken on record.
In view of fresh impleadment of other defendants, Plaintiff
is at liberty to move an appropriate application regarding amendment in
plaint. Such application be filed within four weeks with copy to other
side, who shall file reply to the same within 04 weeks thereafter with
copy to other side.
C. Ld. counsel for Defendant no. 2 has filed written statement
a/w reply to the Plaintiff’s application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC
and another application under Order 8 Rule 1 & 10 CPC on behalf of
-- 2 of 3 --
-3-
defendant no. 2 as per Index running upto 31 pages. Copy supplied.
Ld. counsel for Defendant no. 2 submits that she will also
vakalatnama on behalf of Defendant no. 4 to 6 on next date.
Arguments heard on Defendant no. 2’s application under
Order 8 Rule 1 & 10 CPC seeking condonation of delay in filing the
written statement. I have perused the record.
For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing
the written statement is condoned and same is taken on record. Thus, the
aforesaid application is disposed off. Written statement of Defendant
no. 2 is taken on record.
Put up for further proceedings on 15.10.2025.
(MOHAMMAD EHTESHAM)
District Judge-03 (Shahdara),
KKD Courts, Delhi. 14.07.2025
-- 3 of 3 --