Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 2331 (DEL)

Jai Prakash Jain v. Dinesh Kumar Gupta

2023-04-20

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA

body2023
ORDER [ The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode ] CM APPL. 19553/2023 (Exemption) 1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. Application stands disposed of. CM APPL. 19552/2023 (By respondent for fresh directions) 3. This is an application under Section 151 CPC, 1908 on behalf of the applicant/respondent stating that the learned Trial has violated the direction passed by this Court on 21.02.2023 whereby the petition was disposed of. 4. Mr. Sethi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant/respondent draws attention of this Court to the order dated 21.02.2023, particularly to para 8 to 11 to submit that the directions were clear, in that, the learned Trial Court was to take up the leave to defend application on 18.03.2023, the date which was already fixed before the learned Trial Court in the suit pending before it. 5. Mr. Sethi submits that rather than taking up the aforesaid application, the learned Trial Court had taken note of the fact that the petitioner/non-applicant filed application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC as also an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC was filed by thirty party for which the learned Trial Court provided time for filing reply, rather than hearing the application for leave to defend as directed by this Court. 6. Mr. Sethi submits that directions were very clear and it is not understandable as to why and in what circumstances, the learned Trial Court did not follow the directions as mentioned in the order dated 21.02.2023. 7. Mr. Jain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/non- applicant submits that it was only on account of application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC as well as another application under Order I Rule 10 CPC filed by another party, the learned Trial Court had issued notice therein and time thereto for filing reply was granted to the parties. 8. I have heard the submissions of Mr.Sethi, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent as well as Mr. Harshit Jain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/non-applicant. 9. After having perused the said order dated 21.02.2023, this Court is of the considered and firm opinion that the directions contained in para 10 of the said order leave no ambiguity, moreover, there was no chance of misunderstanding or unclear directions having been given to the learned Trial Court. 10. Harshit Jain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/non-applicant. 9. After having perused the said order dated 21.02.2023, this Court is of the considered and firm opinion that the directions contained in para 10 of the said order leave no ambiguity, moreover, there was no chance of misunderstanding or unclear directions having been given to the learned Trial Court. 10. Paragraphs 8 to 11 of the order dated 21.02.2023 are extracted hereunder: "8. Mr. Sharma, very fairly submits that the issue with respect to filing the rejoinder itself has taken substantial time for resolution by the learned Trial Court and requests that the suitable direction for expeditious disposal of the entire petition may be passed. 9. In view of the aforesaid submissions, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner/respondent can be given one chance to file his rejoinder within one week from today failing which the said permission will stand recalled. However, the same is allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs.20,000/- to be paid to the respondent/landlord within a week from today. The valid receipt thereof shall be filed alongwith rejoinder with an index before the learned Trial Court before the next date of hearing. 10. In view of the aforesaid submission of Mr. Sharma, learned Trial Court is requested to take up the leave to defend application and dispose of the same in accordance with law on 18.03.2023 when it is informed that the suit is listed for hearing. 11. Learned Trial Court is further requested to pass final orders expeditiously within the next six weeks from the date of hearing arguments." 11. It would be appropriate to extract the order dated 18.03.2023 passed by the learned Trial Court with respect to the instant application which is annexure P-2 to the present application. "Matter is listed for arguments on leave to defend application. Ld. counsel for respondent submits that he had challenged the order dated 24.01.2023 passed by this court and the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi was pleased to allowed his CM(M) No. 268/2023 vide order dated 21.02.2023 with direction to file the rejoinder within a week subject to cost of Rs.20,000/- to be paid to the petitioner/landlord. Copy of order dated 21.02.2023 is filed on record. Further, it has been directed to pass final orders within next six weeks from the date of hearing of arguments. Ld. Copy of order dated 21.02.2023 is filed on record. Further, it has been directed to pass final orders within next six weeks from the date of hearing of arguments. Ld. counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has received the cost of Rs.20,000/- through e-mode. Rejoinder to reply to leave to defend application has been filed on behalf of respondent in compliance of order passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Same is taken on record. Copy supplied. At this stage, an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC alongwith vakalatnama and certain documents has been filed on behalf of applicant Sh. Amit Dhankard for his impleadment as necessary party to the present eviction petition. Copy supplied to Ld. counsel for petitioner. Copy be also supplied to Ld. counsel for respondent today itself. Reply, if any, be filed by the petitioner within a week, with advance copy to opposite side. Another application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC has been filed on behalf of respondent. Copy supplied. Reply, if any, be filed by the petitioner within a week, with advance copy to opposite side. List the matter for reply and arguments on application under Order I Rule 10 CPC moved by the applicant/reply and arguments on application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC moved by respondent on 21.04.2023 ." From the perusal of the aforesaid order dated 18.03.2023 passed by the learned Trial Court, it is clear that the learned Trial Court had not even made an attempt to hear part arguments on 18.03.2023 as directed. It appears that the learned Trial Court has taken the aforesaid directions in a very casual and routine manner. 12. It is reminded to the learned Trial Court that this Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, exercises supervisory control over the Subordinate Courts and directions passed by this Court ought to be mandatorily complied with and brooks no ambiguity. 13. This Court is refraining from making any observations on the conduct of the learned Trial Court while considering the special directions passed by this Court for disposal of the leave to defend application on 18.03.2023, however, a copy of this order be sent to District & Sessions Judge who may counsel the learned Trial Court. This Court deems it appropriate to leave it at that. 14. It is given to understand by Mr. This Court deems it appropriate to leave it at that. 14. It is given to understand by Mr. Sethi, learned senior counsel that the matter is listed before learned Trial Court tomorrow i.e. 21.04.2023. 15. It would be well advised that the learned Trial Court takes up the application for leave to defend and hear the same and dispose it of in accordance with law within one week from 21.04.2023. 16. With aforesaid directions, the application stands disposed of. 17. At this stage, Mr. Jain, learned counsel appearing for the non- applicant requests that along with leave to defend application, other applications may be disposed of wherever pleadings are complete. 18. This Court rejects the prayer. The learned Trial Court shall hear the application for leave to defend in the first instance. 19. A copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of Court Master.