High CourtsSingle Bench

Vinay Kumar vs Sudhir Kumar @S Balyan

Delhi High Court · Decided on 7 December 2020 · Citation: (2020) 12 DEL CK 0039

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order 39 Rule 1, Order 11 Rule 1(10), Order 39 Rule 2, Order 6 Rule 17
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Miscellaneous (Main) No. 544, 547 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

26 paragraphs · 391 words

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J

CM APPL.27898/2020 (exemption) in CM(M) 544/2020 CM APPL.27966/2020 (exemption) in CM(M) 547/2020

Exemptions are allowed subject to all just exceptions.

CM(M) 544/2020 & CM APPL.27897/2020 (stay) & CM(M) 547/2020 & CM APPL.27965/2020 (stay)

1.

The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.

2.

Petitioner in CM(M) 544/2020 is aggrieved by order dated 08.10.2020, whereby, application of the petitioner to place on record certain documents

was partly disallowed. Petitioner in CM(M) 547/2020 impugns order dated 27.10.2020, whereby, application of the petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17

CPC was adjourned and it was directed that the arguments on the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC filed by the respondent shall be

heard first.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Trial Court should not have adjourned the amendment application and proceed further with the

arguments on the stay application filed by the respondent.

4.

Learned senior counsel for the respondent submits that applications have been filed by the petitioner to delay the proceedings and the amendment

sought would not affect the case of the respondent/plaintiff.

5.

After some arguments, learned counsel for the parties for the purposes of expeditious disposal of the Suit have agreed that the petitions be disposed

of in the following terms:-

(i) The impugned order dated 08.10.2020 is set aside to the extent that it rejects the application of the petitioner Order 11 Rule 1 (10) CPC

partly and disallows the taking on record of some documents.

(ii) Application under Order 11 Rule 1 (10) CPC is allowed and all the documents sought to be placed on record by the petitioner are taken

on record of the Trial Court.

(iii) Application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, seeking amendment of the Written Statement is allowed. The amended written statement

annexed to the application is taken on record of the Trial Court.

(iv) Respondent/plaintiff shall file replication to the written statement within two weeks from today.

(v) The Trial Court shall proceed further with the arguments on the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 filed by the respondent and

endeavour to dispose of the same within a period of one month from today.

6.

Petitions are allowed in the above terms.

7.

Copy of the judgment be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to counsels through email.