IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J.
Raj Kumar Mittal - Plaintiff
Versus
Baldev Kumar & Ors. – Defendants
CS(OS) 178 of 2025 and I.A. 7348 of 2025
Decided On : 27-03-2025
ORDER :
I.A. 8058/2025 (under Order VI Rule 17 read with Order I Rule 10, CPC, 1908 for amendment of plaint and for impleading Mrs. Anupama Mittal, as plaintiff No.2)
1. Heard.
2. For the reason stated in the application, the same is allowed and the plaintiff is permitted to incorporate the amendment, as stated in the application.
3. In addition, the plaintiff is also permitted to implead Mrs. Anupama Mittal, as plaintiff No.2.
4. Let the amended plaint be placed on record within two working days from today, specifically highlighting the paragraphs permitted to be amended by the order passed hereinabove.
I.A. 7349/2025 (Exemption)
5. Plaintiff shall file legible/original/certified and clearer copies of exempted documents, compliant with practice rules, before the next date of hearing.
6. The application for exemption is allowed, subject to the plaintiff granting inspection of the documents filed, as and when required to do so, or filing the original documents at the stage of admission/denial.
7. The application stands disposed of.
CS(OS) 178/2025
8. Heard.
9. The instant civil suit is for the following relief:-
a) " Pass a decree of declaration that the Agreement to Sell dated 29.12.2021 in favour of Smt. Anupama Mittal is legally valid and binding document and the same is legally enforceable inter-se Smt. Anupama Mittal and Defendant Nos. 1 to 5.
b) Pass a decree for specific performance of Agreement to Sell dated 29.12.2021 in favour of Smt. Anupama Mittal and against the Defendants thereby directing Defendant Nos. 1 to 5 to sell, transfer, convey and execute a proper sale deed in accordance with law and to deliver vacant and peaceful possession of the suit property situated at A-12, Anand Vihar, New Delhi - 110092.
c) Pass a decree of permanent injunction in favour of the Smt. Anupama Mittal against the Defendant Nos. 1 to 5 restraining these defendants, their agents, attorneys, assignees, legal heirs and representatives from selling, alienating, transferring or creating any third party interest in the property situated at A-12, Anand Vihar, New Delhi – 110092.
(d) Pass a decree for permanent injunction in favour of Smt. Anupama Mittal and against the Defendant Nos. 1 to 6, restraining the defendants, their agents, attorneys, assignees, legal heirs and representatives from interfering with the possession of Plaintiff in suit property situated at A-12, Anand Vihar, New Delhi – 110092.
In the alternative
e) Pass a decree of declaration that Collaboration Agreement dated 15.06.2020 entered into between Rammy Ghai and Baldev Kumar is null and void.
f) In the event of CS (OS) No. 142/ 2022 titled Rammy Ghai v Baldev Kumar being allowed, pass a decree of Specific Performance of Agreement to Sell dated 29.12.2021 to the extent of the share of Defendant No. 1 in the suit property situated at A-12, Anand Vihar, New Delhi – 110092 in favour of Smt. Anupama Mittal with pro-rata reduction of the consideration.
g) Pass a decree of damages to the tune of Rs. 9,00,00,000/- (Rupees Nine Crores Only) along with pendente lite and future interest @ 18 % per annum from the date of filing of the present suit till the date of actual realization of the amount against the Defendants No. 1 to 5.
h) Award costs of the suit against the Defendants and in favour of the Plaintiff.”
10. The plaint be registered as a suit. Summons be issued to the defendants by all permissible modes on filing of process fee. Affidavit of service be filed within two weeks.
11. Summons shall state that the written statement(s) shall be filed by the defendant within 30 days from the date of receipt of summons. Along with the written statement(s), the defendants shall also file affidavit(s) of admission/denial of the documents of the plaintiff, without which the written statement(s) shall not be taken on record.
12. Liberty is given to the plaintiff to file replication(s) within 15 days of the receipt of the written statement(s). Along with the replication(s), if any, filed by the plaintiff, affidav
The court allowed the amendment of plaint and impleading of a new plaintiff, emphasizing the enforceability of agreements and the protection of rights under the doctrine of lis pendens.
The court emphasizes the importance of procedural compliance in civil suits, particularly regarding document submission and timely responses from defendants.
The court emphasized compliance with procedural rules for the registration of the suit and issuance of summons to ensure fair proceedings.
The court condoned the delay in re-filing the suit under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, emphasizing compliance with procedural rules for document filing.
The court affirmed the maintainability of the suit under the Commercial Courts Act, emphasizing compliance with mediation requirements and procedural rules for document submission.
The court's decision emphasized that an amendment under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC should not change the nature or character of the suit or its cause of action.
Procedural rules should facilitate justice, allowing for the admission of necessary documents and clarifying criteria for adding parties.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.