Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Chandra Dhari Singh, J.
H.QR.P. Limited - Appellant
Versus
M.T.I Limited - Respondent
CS(OS) 161 of 2012
Decided On : 12-12-2022
Section 10 of the Code prevents trial of a suit if the matter is directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit involving the same parties, which was not met here.
Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 10 - Application for stay of suit - Applicants claimed stay to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, citing pending similar suits. Court examined criteria for Section 10 applicability and determined the matters in issue were not directly and substantially the same. Dismissed application for lack of merit. (Paras 1-17)
(B) Section 10 - Suit must be stayed if issue is the same in previously instituted suit. The requirement for the previously instituted suit to involve the same parties was not satisfied. (Paras 8-15)
(C) Judicial interpretation of Section 10 - Emphasized the necessity for avoiding conflicting judgments among concurrent jurisdiction. (Paras 9-10)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for stay of suit based on multiple pending matters. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments over potential delay and validity of stay plea. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's intent to carefully consider submissions. (Para 6) |
| 4. essentials for invoking section 10 of cpc. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. judicial precedents on preventing multiplicity of suits. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 6. meaning of 'directly and substantially in issue'. (Para 11 , 13) |
| 7. court's findings on issues not satisfying section 10. (Para 12 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 8. dismissal of the application with final order. (Para 17 , 18) |
ORDER
Chandra Dhari Singh, J. (Oral) I.A. 4662/2013
1. By way of this application, the defendants no. 11, 12, 20 to 22, 26 to 28 (hereinafter referred to as the `applicants') prays for the stay of the captioned suit, in accordance with Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as `the Code') inter alia with the following reliefs:
"It is prayed that this Hon'ble Court is pleased to stay the present suit qua defendants No. 11, 12, 20 to 22 and 26 to 28.
Any other order as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be passed in favour of said defendants."
2. The applicants by way of the present application have taken a plea that the captioned suit is leading to multiplicity of the proceedings between the parties, as the issues involved in the captioned suit are also directly and substantially in issue, in various previously instituted suits between the same parties or between parties litigating under the same title.
3. For elaborating their plea so made by way of the instant application, the applicants have given the following details of the various suits pending between the parties:
(i) The Defendant No.11 J.J. International Private Limited had previously filed Company Petition No.255/2010 against plaintiff No-1 in which it had claimed Rs.2,75,06,870.64 outstanding up to the end of January 2009. In respect of that claim defendant No-11 had filed complete statement of account in that petition.
(ii) That defendant No.12 had previously filed a suit for recovery bearing No. CS (OS) 3057/2011 on the basis of a loan given to plaintiff No.1 during the period 01.02.2007 to 16.07.2009.
(iii) M/s Acme Resources Limited defendant No.20 had previously filed a case bearing C.C No.16/01/10 regarding loan of Rs.Five crores advanced by it to plaintiff No.1 in May, 2008 which is the subject matter of the said Complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
(iv) M/s Abhipra Capital Limited defendant No.21 had previously filed a Company Petition 476/2009, in respect of loan of Rs.25,000,00/- (Twenty Five Lacs) advanced by it to plaintiff No.1 through cheque in November 2006 which was repayable with interest @ 18% p.a.
(v) M/s Bathla and Company Pvt. Ltd. Defendant No. 22 had previously filed a Company Petition 477/2009, against plaintiff No.1 in respect of Loan of Rs.10,00,000/- (Ten Lacs) advanced by it to plaintiff No.1 on 25th November 2006.
(vi) Shri Kanwal Kant Chagti defendant No.26 had previously filed a suit No-CS(OS) 822/2011 in the High Court of Delhi in respect of loan of Rs.49,07,663/- advanced by it to plaintiff No.1 out of which some money was repaid by plaintiff No.1 and the balance being Rs-39,80,416.80/- for which said suit is pending.
(vii) Shri Gulshan Rai (since deceased) defendant No.27 had previously filed a suit No.CS(OS) 824/2011 in High Court of Delhi which is pending regarding money advanced to plaintiff No.1 during the period March 2007 to October 2008 as Share Application money amounting to Rs.1,10,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Ten Lacs) for which said suit is still pending.
(viii) M/s Upper India Trading Company (Delhi) Private Limited (defendant No.28) had previously filed a suit No. CS(OS) 823/2011 in the High Court of Delhi regarding loan advanced by it to plaintiff No.1 during November and December 2007 for which said suit is still pending.
4. Learne
