Rohit Sehgal ..... Plaintiff vs Rakesh Sehgal
2015 Latest Caselaw 6775 Del

5
$~
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     CS(OS) 894/2010 & IAs No.14280/2015 & 12186/2013
      ROHIT SEHGAL                                  ..... Plaintiff
                         Through Mr.S.K.Sharma, Mr.Rahul Sharma and
                         Mr.Prayas Aneja, Advocate

                         versus

      RAKESH SEHGAL                                  ..... Defendant
                         Through Mr.V.K.Ohri, Advocate with defendant
                         in person

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

                         ORDER

% 09.09.2015

1. The plaintiff has instituted the present suit against the defendant

praying inter alia for recovery of damages and permanent injunction

respect of an immoveable property bearing No.A-1/107, Safdarjung

Enclave, New Delhi.

2. Mr.Sharma, learned counsel for the plaintiff states that when the

suit was listed for admission on 10.5.2015, an ex-parte ad interim

order was passed directing the defendant to maintain status-quo in

respect of the title and possession of the suit property till the rights of

the parties are adjudicated. Subsequently, on 28.7.2010, the

defendant had entered appearance and stated that since the probate

petition is pending adjudication, his client shall not dispossess the

plaintiff from the suit premises till the rights of the parties are

adjudicated. Thereafter, issues were framed in the suit on 30.5.2013

and in the course of trial, the defendant has filed an application under

Order IX Rule VIII CPC, on which was notice was issued on 20.7.2015,

returnable for today.

3. Today, learned counsel for the plaintiff states that if the

defendant is willing to abide by the undertaking given by him and

recorded in the order dated 28.7.2010, passed in IA No.6122/2010,

his client shall not press the relief of damages and he is willing to

withdraw the present suit.

4. Counsel for the defendant states on instructions from his client

that he is willing to abide by the statement recorded on 28.7.2010.

5. Accordingly, while binding the defendant to the aforesaid

statement, the present suit is disposed of, along with pending

applications, except for Cr.MA No.892/2012. The parties are left to

bear their own expenses.

HIMA KOHLI, J SEPTEMBER 09, 2015 mk