Delhi High Court
Komman Peopele Welfare Society (Regd) vs Sukhbir Singh & Anr. on 31 January, 2024
Author: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Bench: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
$~1 & 2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAO(OS) 7/2024, CM APPL. 3790/2024
KOMMAN PEOPELE WELFARE SOCIETY (REGD)
..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Vibhor Garg, Mr. Aditya
Bhardwaj, Mr. Keshav Tiwari and
Ms. Ishita Mehta and Ms. Varada
Bhutani, Advocates.
versus
SUKHBIR SINGH & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. S.K. Chaturvedi, Ms. Ankita
Agrawal and Ms. Sheereen,
Advocates
+ FAO(OS) 8/2024
KOMMAN PEOPELE WELFARE SOCIETY (REGD)
..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Vibhor Garg, Mr. Aditya
Bhardwaj, Mr. Keshav Tiwari and
Ms. Ishita Mehta and Ms. Varada
Bhutani, Advocates.
versus
SUKHBIR SINGH & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. S.K. Chaturvedi, Ms. Ankita
Agrawal and Ms. Sheereen,
Advocates
% Date of Decision: 31st January, 2024
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, ACJ : (ORAL)
CM APPL. 3791/2024 in FAO(OS) 7/2024 (for exemption)
CM APPL. 3794/2024 in FAO(OS) 8/2024 (for exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the present applications stand disposed of.
FAO(OS) 7/2024 & CM APPL. 3790/2024
FAO(OS) 8/2024
1. The present appeals have been filed by the Plaintiff against the orders
passed in the Civil Suit bearing CS (OS) No. 45/2022.
1.1. In FAO (OS) 7/2024, the Appellant has challenged the order dated 6 th
March, 2023, whereby, the learned Single Judge allowed the OA No.
25/2023 and condoned the delay in filing the written statement, subject to
payment of costs of Rs. 30,000/-.
1.2. In FAO (OS) 8/2024, the Appellant has challenged the order dated
13th December, 2023, passed by learned Single Judge, closing its right to file
the replication after recording that no replication has been filed.
2. The learned counsel for the Appellant in FAO(OS) 8/2024 states that
there is an error apparent on the face of record in the order dated 13th
December, 2023, since the replication along with affidavit of
admission/denial of documents stood filed on 23rd October, 2023 and 26th
October, 2023, respectively.
3. Learned counsel for the Respondent/defendant in FAO(OS) 8/2024
has entered appearance. He states that he has no objection to the appeal i.e.,
FAO (OS) 8/2024, being allowed. He states that however, the FAO (OS)
7/2024 is not maintainable as the costs of Rs. 30,000/-, imposed by the
learned Single Judge vide order dated 6th March, 2023, stands paid. In reply,
learned counsel for the Appellant in FAO(OS) 7/2024 fairly admits that he
has received the costs of Rs. 30,000/-.
4. After some arguments, learned counsel for the Respondent in
FAO(OS) 8/2024 fairly concedes that FAO (OS) 8/2024 can be allowed in
view of the error apparent. In reply, learned counsel for the Appellant in
FAO(OS) 7/2024 states that he as well has instructions to withdraw FAO
(OS) 7/2024 in view of the Appellant's replication being allowed. He further
states that he will refund the cost of Rs. 30,000/- received from the
Respondent in view of the delay in filing the replication. The said statement
is taken on record and the Appellant is directed to remit the said amount in
two (2) weeks.
5. Accordingly, FAO (OS) 8/2024 is allowed and order dated 13 th
December, 2023, is set aside. It is directed that the replication and the
affidavit filed by the Appellant shall be taken on record. Pending
applications stand disposed of.
6. Further, FAO (OS) 7/2024 is dismissed as withdrawn. Even
otherwise, it is settled law that the said appeal could not have been
maintained by the Appellant after having accepted the costs of Rs. 30,000/-
(Re. Hemant Verma vs. Nazibulla Khan & Anr.1). It is directed that the
affidavit of admission/denial of documents filed by the Respondents shall be
taken on record. Pending applications stand disposed of.
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
JANUARY 31, 2024/rhc
2017 SCC OnLine Del 11184
