IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J
M/S. SOLOMAN ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AURHORITY & ORS. – Respondent
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
I.A. 13600/2023: under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC filed on behalf of the defendant No. 1/DDA for rejection of the plaint) & I.A. 9591/2023: under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC filed on behalf of the defendant No. 4 Mr. Harish Chawla for rejection of the plaint on the grounds of under valuation and deficiency in payment of court fees and other grounds).
1. The aforementioned two Applications under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as „CPC‟) has been filed on behalf of the defendant No. 1/DDA, and defendant No. 4, Mr. Harish Chawla respectively, for rejection of the Suit.
2. Both the applications mentioned-above, are being taken together as similar grounds have been taken in both the applications for rejection of the Suit.
3. It is submitted in the applications that the present Suit is liable to be rejected on the following grounds.
4. The first ground taken for rejection is gross undervaluation of the suit property in question and gross deficiency in the amount of court fee paid in the instant matter/Suit.
5. It is submitted in the applications that the plaintiff has valued the Suit Property at Rs.18,50,00,00/- Crores and has paid the co
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.