O R D E R

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. Learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that on a perusal of the pleadings of the previously instituted cases as have been delineated above, it would transpire that they raise the same question of controversy as the one raised in the instant suit, filed by the plaintiffs.

5. Per Contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent/Plaintiff has vehemently argued that the instant application is nothing but a design to delay the captioned suit to reach a logical culmination. It is further submitted that instant application under Section 10 is sans any merit as the parties