CS(COMM) 374/2020 Page 1 of 8

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Date of Decision : 19^th September, 2022

+

CS(COMM) 374/2020

RAJ KUMAR GUPTA & ANR.

..... Plaintiffs

Through:

Mr. N. Prabhakar with Mr. Dhruv

Sharma and Mr. Uday Sharma,

Advocates.

versus

JAGAN NATH BAJAJ & ORS.

..... Defendants

Through:

Mr. S.S. Tripathy and Mr. Gagan

Singh Bagga, Advocate for D-1.

Mr. Nitesh Kumar, Advocate for D-4.

Mr. Lovenish Mendiratta, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

AMIT BANSAL, J. (ORAL)

I.A. 3221/2022(for condonation of delay in re-filing I.A.3220/2022

1.

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and

delay in re-filing I.A. No.3220/2022 is condoned.

2.

The application stands disposed of.

I.A. 6249/2022(O-VI R-17 of CPC) & I.A. 6250/2022(O-VII R-14(3) of

CPC)

3.

By way of I.A. No.6249/2022, the plaintiffs seek to amend the plaint

and by way of I.A. No.6250/2022, the plaintiffs seek to file additional

documents.

4.

Notice in these applications was issued on 25^th April, 2022. No replies

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003745

CS(COMM) 374/2020 Page 2 of 8

have been filed on behalf of the defendants.

5.

In I.A. No.6249/2022, it has been stated that inadvertently, the plaint

mentions a receipt of sum of Rs.1.51 crores out of the agreed amount of total

consideration of Rs.2.15 crores. The actual amount received by the

defendants prior to the filing of the present suit is Rs.1,50,81,004/- and not

Rs.1.51,00,000/-. In support thereof, I.A. No.6250/2022 has been filed on

behalf of the plaintiffs seeking to file the bank statements.

6.

The suit is at an early stage and issues are yet to be framed.

7.

All the objections with regard to the merits of the matter can be

addressed in the written statement to the amended plaint.

8.

Therefore, no prejudice would be caused to the defendants if the

aforesaid applications are allowed.

9.

Accordingly, the amended plaint filed along with the application is

taken on record and the additional documents sought to be filed by I.A.

No.6250/2022 are permitted to be taken on record.

10.

The applications stand disposed of in terms of above.

I.A. 3220/2022 (of the defendants no.2, 3 & 5 u/Order VII Rule 11 CPC)

& I.A. 7840/2022(of the defendants no.4 u/O-VII R-11 of CPC)

11.

I.A No. 3220/2022 has been filed on behalf of the defendants no.2, 3

and 5 and I.A. No. 7840/2022 has been filed on behalf of the defendant no.4

seeking rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil

Procedure, 1908 (CPC).

12.

The aforesaid applications are premised on the following grounds:

i.

That the present suit as filed by the plaintiffs does not fall within the

category of a commercial dispute under Section 2(1)(c) of the

Commercial Courts Act, 2015 as the property in question is a

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003745

CS(COMM) 374/2020 Page 3 of 8

residential property. Reliance in this regard is placed on the judgment

in Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited v. K.S. Infraspace LLP

and Anr., (2020) 15 SCC 585.

ii.

That the present suit is not maintainable on account of non-

compliance with Section 12 A (1) of the Commercial Courts Act,

2015 in as much as the plaintiffs have not taken recourse to pre-

institution mediation.

iii.

Plaintiffs have not valued the suit properly for the purposes of Court

Fees and jurisdiction. The market value of the two floors of the

property bearing