##PAGE1##

$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010388942022 + CS(OS) 635/2022 SMT. NEELAM SHOKEEN @ MONA .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Harshit Jain, Mr. Shubham Singh, and Mr. Aman Aggarwal, Advs.

versus SMT. KRISHNA DEVI & ORS. .....Defendants Through: None CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

O R D E R

% 22.09.2026 I.A. 20377/2023 (for dismissal of suit)

1. None has appeared on behalf of Defendant Nos. 4 and 5 on the last date as well as today.

2. Defendant No. 4 and 5 had filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 praying that the plaintiff has not come with clean hands and had suppressed the material facts from this Court. However, it is no where mentioned as to which facts were concealed.

3. Further, it is stated that Late Mr. Ramphal had severed all his relations with the plaintiff and had disowned her from all his moveable and immoveable properties by publishing a Public Notice in newspaper. It has also been stated that the site plans are incorrect. Further, it has been stated that the plantiff has not deposited proper Court fee of the suit.

4. Accordingly, it is prayed that present suit filed by the plaintiff is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed under Order VII and Rule 11 of the CPC.

5. I am of the opinion that all these issues cannot be raised in an application under Order VII and Rule 11 of the CPC which deals with the rejection of plaint in case there is no cause of action is disclosed, relief claimed is undervalued, the case is insufficiently stamped and suit appears from the statement to be barred by any law etc. The defendant No. 4 and 5 were required to state and describe as to how his suit is undervalued. Further, suit cannot be rejected on the ground of suppression of material from the Court as it would be a triable issue.

6. As none of the conditions has been specified in the application, the application is dismissed.

CS(OS) 635/2022

7. List the matter for framing of issues on 28.10.2026.

VINOD KUMAR, J SEPTEMBER 22, 2026/ss