Delhi High Court
Shamsher Singh Kukreja vs Amarjeet Singh Bindra & Ors. on 24 April, 2015
Author: Hima Kohli
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ TR.P.(C) 6/2015
Decided on 24.04.2015
IN THE MATTER OF :
SHAMSHER SINGH KUKREJA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.P.S.Vats and
Mr.Manish Vats, Advocates
versus
AMARJEET SINGH BINDRA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.P.K.Sharma, Advocate for R-1
Mr.R.M.Aggarwal and Ms.Deepika Yadav,
Advocates for R-2 to R-4
Mr.V.K.Mishra, Advocate for R-5
CORAM
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)
1. The present Transfer Petition has been filed by the petitioner
under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying inter alia that
Suit No.151/2011, entitled "Shamsher Singh Kukreja Vs. Tejender
Singh Padam & Ors." , be transferred to this court for trial.
2. Notice was issued in the present petition and pursuant thereto,
learned counsels enter appearance for the respondents No.1, 2 to 4 &
5. However, none is present on behalf of the respondent No.6.
Counsels for the parties jointly state that the respondent No.6 was
proceeded against ex-parte in Suit No.151/2011.
3. Counsels for the respondent No.1, 2 to 4 & 5 oppose the present
petition as they state that Suit No.151/2011 pending in the trial court,
was filed prior to the petitioner having instituted CS(OS) No.378/2012
which is pending in the High Court and both the suits are in respect of
the very same property. They state that the present petition is
nothing but a dilatory tactic adopted by the petitioner to delay the
proceedings in Suit No.151/2011, which is at an advance stage.
Learned counsels state that it would be appropriate if the proceedings
in CS(OS) No.378/2012 are stayed so that the court can have the
benefit of the judgment in suit No.151/2011 which is virtually at the
fag end of trial.
4. The court is informed that issues have already been framed in
Suit No.151/2011, examination-in-chief of the plaintiff has also been
recorded and now the case is at the stage of cross-examining the
plaintiff's witnesses. However, in CS(OS) No.378/2012, issues have
yet to be framed.
5. Counsel for the petitioner does not deny the fact that Suit
No.151/2011 had been instituted by his client, prior in time and the
same is at the stage of trial where, the petitioner's witnesses are to be
cross-examined on 6.5.2015. In other words, it is likely that the
evidence in the said suit would be concluded in two/three dates and
the case would be ripe for final arguments.
6. In the given facts and circumstances, the court declines to allow
the present petition which is disposed of with directions to the parties
to ensure expeditious conclusion of the evidence in Suit No.151/2011.
After a decision is taken by the trial court in the said suit, a copy of
the judgment pronounced shall be placed on the file of CS(OS)
No.378/2012.
7. The petition is disposed of.
(HIMA KOHLI)
APRIL 24, 2015 JUDGE
mk
