Back
2023 Supreme(Del) 5550
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J.
Jawaharlal Nehru National Youth Centre & Anr. - Appellants
Versus
Praveen Singh Aron & Ors. - Respondents
CM(M) 1803 of 2023, CM APPL. 57184 of 2023 & CM APPL. 57185 of 2023
Decided On : 06-11-2023
Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Seema Sindhu, Advocate, for the Petitioners.
Mr. Paritosh Budhiraja and Mr. Shashikant Bhardwaj, Advocates with Mr. Praveen Singh Aron, in person Mr. Ujjwal Kumar, Mr. Abhinav Kumar Srivastava and Mr. Dharmendra, Advocates, for the Respondents.
IMPORTANT POINT
Competence of the Trial Court to determine the issue of representation in civil suit proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Headnote:
Representation - Civil Suit Proceedings - Article 227 of the Constitution of India - CS 57975/2016.
Fact of the Case:
The civil suit involved a dispute over the representation of plaintiff no.1, Jawahar Lal Nehru National Youth Centre, following the passing of its then Vice president and General Secretary, Smt. Indira Mayaram. The Trial Court adjourned the proceedings with directions to ascertain the authorized representative of plaintiff no.1.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the Trial Court was competent to adjudicate the objections raised by the defendants regarding the representation of plaintiff no.1 and directed the Trial Court to frame a preliminary issue to determine whether Sh. Arvind Mayaram was authorized to represent plaintiff no.1.
Issues: The main issue was whether Sh. Arvind Mayaram had the authority to represent plaintiff no.1 in the civil suit proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the Trial Court was competent to decide the issue of representation and directed the Trial Court to frame a preliminary issue to determine the authorization of Sh. Arvind Mayaram to represent plaintiff no.1.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of, and the Trial Court was directed to decide the issue of Sh. Arvind Mayaram's authorization to represent plaintiff no.1 in the pending suit.
JUDGMENT
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 57185/2023 (for exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.
CM(M) 1803/2023, CM APPL. 57184/2023
1. The present petition impugns the order dated 22.07.2023 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India passed by the Additional District Judge - 01, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in CS 57975/2016, titled as Jawahar Lal Nehru National Youth Central & Ors v. Sh Narain Dutt Tiwari & Ors (`Trial Court') whereby the Trial Court adjourned the suit proceedings with directions to the parties to first avail the appropriate legal recourse to ascertain who will represent plaintiff no.1 to proceed further in the matter.
1.1. The plaintiff no.1 before the Trial Court is Jawahar Lal Nehru National Youth Centre which is Petitioner no. 1 herein. The aforesaid civil suit was filed by plaintiff no.1 through its then Vice president and General Secretary Smt. Indira Mayaram seeking Declaration and Permanent Injunction against the Respondents therein.
1.2. Smt. Indira Mayaram has since passed away. The Petitioner no. 1 has taken a stance before the Trial Court that the plaintiff no.1 is being represented in the said civil suit by Sh. Arvind Mayaram.
1.3. The defendant nos. 2 and 4 in the civil suit, Sh. Praveen Singh Aron has specifically raised an objection to the representation of plaintiff no.1 by Sh. Arvind Mayaram.
1.4. In view of the objections raised by defendant nos. 2 and 4, the impugned order dated 22.07.2023 has been passed by the Trial Court which reads as under:
"ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, PHC, NEW DELHI
CS 57975/16
Jawahar Lal Nehru National Youth Central
Vs.
Sh Narain Dutt Tiwari (DHC)
22.07.2023 at 11.41 a.m.
Present: Ms. Seema Sindhu, Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff no. 1 representing the working President Sh. Arvind Maya Ram.
Sh. Ujjwal Kumar, Ld. Counsel for defendant no.2 also claiming to be representing plaintiff no. 1 through General Secretary/defendant no. 2 alongwith Sh. Purshottam Goyal/defendant no.2. Sh. Gyanender, Ld. Counsel also claiming to be representing plaintiff no.l/defendant no. 4 namely Praveen Singh Aron.
Defendant no.4 in person also claiming to be the General Secretary of plaintiff no. 1 alongwith Sh. Shashi Kant, Ld. Advocate.
Sh. Pradeep Sharma, Ld. Counsel for defendant no. 7. None for the other defendants.
Fresh Vakalatnama has been filed on behalf of plaintiff no.l signed by Sh. Praveen Singh Aron. The same is strongly objected to by counsel Ms. Seema Sindhu.
There is another vakalatnama in the name of Advocate Sh. Shashi Kant filed on 19.07.2023 on behalf of defendant no.4 Sh. Praveen Singh Aron.
Thus, there are two vakalatnamas placed on record on behalf of Sh. Praveen Singh Aron. He also contends that he is General Secretary of plaintiff no.l since 1988 which is vehemently opposed by Ms. Seema Sindhu and Sh. Ujjwal Kumar, Ld. Advocates also claiming to be representing plaintiff no.l.
On behalf of defendant no.7, copy of transfer petition has been moved seeking transfer of this matter from this Court. The same has also been perused. Paragraph no. 3 & 4 of the application has been perused.
This Court also takes strong objection to averments in paragraphs no. 3 & 4 of the application which is baseless and without merit. It is clarified that this Court had only informed the parties who were pleading urgency to seek the matter transferred to any other Court as due to heavy board of this Court, matter cannot be rushed through.
At this stage, as there are three parties claiming having control over plaintiff no.l. The Court therefore, deems it appropriate for the parties to first avail the appropriate legal recourse to ascertain who would represent plaintiff no.l to proceed further in the matter.
Matter be listed on 30.10.2023.
(Vijeta Singh Rawat)
Additional District Judge-01
PHC/New Delhi/22.07.2023"
(Emphasis Supplied)
2. Learned senior counsel for the Petitioners states that the Trial Court before which the aforesai
