* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 08.11.2023 Date of decision: 09.01.2024 + CM(M) 457/2023 & CM APPL. 13615/2023 NAMITA GUPTA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Bhuvan Gugnani, Mr.Rupender Sharma, Advs.

Advs. versus SURAJ HOLDINGS LIMITED ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Ashish Mohan, Mr.Hemant Manjani, Ms.Sagrika Tanwar, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

J U D G M E N T

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is the defendant in the Suit, being CS DJ No. 708/2019 titled M/s Suraj Holdings Ltd. v. Namita Gupta (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Suit’), challenging the order dated 06.03.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Impugned Order’) passed by the learned Additional District Judge- 06, South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘Additional District Judge’), and the order dated 14.03.2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Impugned Order’) passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘Principal District and Sessions Judge’).

Signature Not Verified CM(M) 457/2023 Page 1 of 35 Digitally Signed

2. By the Impugned Order dated 06.03.2023, the learned Additional District Judge, while observing that the dispute between the parties is commercial in nature, directed the file of the Suit to be placed before the Court of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, for passing appropriate orders.

3. By the Impugned Order dated 14.03.2023, the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge directed that the Suit be withdrawn from the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, and transferred the same to the Court of the learned District Judge, Commercial Court-06, South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, for proceeding further in accordance with law.

Factual Matrix

4. The facts, in brief, giving rise to the present petition are that the respondent herein, who is the plaintiff in the Suit, filed the said Suit on 19.08.2019, seeking recovery of a sum of Rs.1,07,37,545.07 along with interest from the petitioner herein. The said Suit was filed by the respondent under Order XXXVII read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short, ‘CPC’).

5. By the order dated 13.12.2019, the learned Additional District Judge treated the Suit as an Ordinary Civil Suit, and issued summons thereon to the petitioner.

6. The petitioner filed her written statement to the Suit, along with a Counter-Claim for seeking recovery of a sum of Rs.40,62,882/-

along with interest.

7. The petitioner, on 10.02.2022, also filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC, contending therein that the Suit was Signature Not Verified CM(M) 457/2023 Page 2 of 35 Digitally Signed raising a commercial dispute, as defined under Section 2(1)(c)(i) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), of the specified value, and as it has been filed without resort to the Pre-Institution Mediation as mandated under Section 12-A of the Act, the plaint is liable to be rejected as being barred by law.

8. It is in the course of hearing of the said application, that the learned Additional District Judge, while observing that the dispute raised in the Suit is commercial in nature, passed the Impugned Order dated 06.03.2023, directing the file of the Suit to be placed before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge for appropriate orders.

9. As noted hereinabove, by the Impugned Order dated 14.03.2023, the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge has been pleased to transfer the Suit to the learned District Judge, Commercial Court-06, South East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi.

10. The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved of the above orders.

Submissions by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner:

11. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Additional District Judge, and even the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, do not have the p