Smt. Shalini Gupta vs Mukesh Kumar
2009 Latest Caselaw 536 Del

*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                             Date of Reserve: February 02, 2009
                              Date of Order: February 13, 2009

+ IA No.9200/07 in Counter Claim No. 449/07 in CS(OS)
No.2394/2006
%                                             13.02.2009
     Smt. Shalini Gupta                         ...Plaintiff
                           Through: Mr. Arun Aggarwal, Adv.

     Versus


     Mukesh Kumar                                  ...Defendant
             Through:      None

     JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA

1.   Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see
     the judgment?

2.   To be referred to the reporter or not?

3.   Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?


     ORDER

1. This application has been made by the plaintiff

(defendant in the suit) under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment

of the Counter Claim.

2. It is submitted by the applicant that at the time

applicant filed her Counter Claim, in Para 5 of Counter Claim she

stated that in case the defendant (plaintiff in the suit) produced

the original title documents pertaining to the suit property or was

found to be in possession thereof, the plaintiff reserves her right to suitably amend the Counter Claim. During the pendency of the

Counter Claim, the defendant in Para 5 of WS to the counter

claim alleged that the original documents were handed over to

the defendant by the plaintiff herein. Thus the documents were

in possession of the defendant herein. The applicant therefore

wants to make necessary amendment in her Counter Claim so as

to delete Para 5 and add Para 5A. In Para 5A, she wants to state

that the defendant had connived with Mr. Swadesh Kumar

predecessor in interest of plaintiff and wrongfully and

fraudulently obtained the original documents namely GPA and

'Will' dated 21.4.2004 and documents of title in favour of

predecessor in interest of the plaintiff. The applicant also wants

to add Para 8A in the Counter Claim stating that the defendant

was entitled to deliver/restitute the original documents of title

referred to in Para 5 of the Counter Claim and the application.

Further amendment sought to be made is in Para 9, Para 10 and

prayer clause. Para 10 is regarding valuation of the suit and

amendment in Para 9 are consequential in view of pleas taken in

Para 5A due to assertion made by defendant in the WS.

3. The application is opposed by the non-

applicant/defendant on the ground that the applicant was aware

that the documents were with the defendant.

4. Since the Counter Claim is at initial stage, issues have

not been framed and the amendment sought to be made is not

going to change the nature of the Counter Claim materially and

also the amendment is not going to prejudice the defendant, I

consider that the amendments should be allowed. I therefore

allow this application. The amendments in the Counter Claim

filed by the applicant are allowed. Amended Counter Claim if not

already filed be filed within one week. Amended WS to the

amended Counter Claim be filed within 4 weeks. Replication be

filed within 2 weeks thereafter.

5. Matter be listed before the Joint Registrar for

admission/denial on 17th July, 2009.

February 13, 2009                   SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA J.
ak