Delhi District Court
Dr. Sreenivas Madireddy vs Maulana Azad Medical College on 31 August, 2023
IN THE COURT OF SH. RAJESH MALIK, ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
JUDGE -06: CENTRAL DISTRICT,
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
CS DJ 751/22
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Dr. Sreenivas Madireddy
S/o Mr. Jagan Mohan Rao
R/o House No.5,
Type-V, Staff Quarters,
Maulana Azad Medical College Campus,
Kotla Marg, New Delhi-110002.
..........Plaintiff
VERSUS
1. Maulana Azad Medical College
Through the Dean i.e. Dr. Ritu Arora
2 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi-110002
2. Dr. Upender Kishore
Maulana Azad Medical College
2 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi-110002
3. Dr. Tayyaba Tanvir
Maulana Azad Medical College
2 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi-110002
4. Dr. Vaisakh Sanal
Maulana Azad Medical College
2 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi-110002
CS DJ 751/2022
Dr. Sreenivas Madireddy vs. Maulana Azad Medical College & Ors. Page No. 1 of 7
5. Dr. Sunita Das
Vardhman Mahavir Medical College
Safdarjung Hospital, Ansari Nagar West,
New Delhi-110029
6. Dr. Aakash Chaudhary
Vardhman Mahavir Medical College
Safdarjung Hospital, Ansari Nagar West,
New Delhi-110029
7. Dr. Alok Maurya
Vardhman Mahavir Medical College
Safdarjung Hospital, Ansari Nagar West,
New Delhi-110029
........Defendants
Other Details :
Date of Institution : 26.07.2022
Date of Reserving Judgment : 05.08.2023
Date of Judgment : 31.08.2023
An Interpleader Civil Suit under Section 88 read with Order XXXV
Rule 1 of CPC
JUDGMENT:-
1. The plaintiff filed the present interpleader civil suit under Section 88 CPC read with Order 35 CPC. At the time of filing of the suit, the plaintiff was working as the Director/Professor of the Forensic Medicine at the Maulana Azad Medical College.
CS DJ 751/2022Dr. Sreenivas Madireddy vs. Maulana Azad Medical College & Ors. Page No. 2 of 7 Averments in the plaint:
2. According to the plaint, he is the custodian of some confidential personal files of the defendants No.3 to 7. He claims no interest in these confidential personal files. He seeks indemnity from potential civil/criminal/departmental/service liability from transferring of the confidential personal files of the defendants No.3 to 7 in compliance of the directions of the Dean of Maulana Azad Medical College. The plaintiff has averred that the defendant no.3 has filed FIR under Section 354/354A/354B/509/506/34 IPC against the defendant no.2 at I.P. Estate Police Station and the other defendants are the witnesses in the said FIR and therefore, the present interpleader suit has been filed to seek the leave of the court to seek indemnity for the plaintiff in relation to the confidential personal files. It is averred that the plaintiff is under inhibition that act of transfer of confidential file to the D-2 would be tantamount of aiding and abetting the harassment of D-3 to D-7 and might attract criminal punishment under Section 109 read with Section 120B of the IPC. The plaintiff has also relied upon the Section 19 of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act 2013. The plaintiff has also referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India, wherein the right of the privacy has been recognised as a fundamental right.
Section 88 C.P.C:
3. At this stage, it is relevant here to refer to Section 88 CPC which is reproduced here as under for ready reference:-
"88. where interpleader suit may be instituted - Where two or more persons claim adversely to one another the same debts, sum of money or other property, movable or immovable from another person, who claims no interest CS DJ 751/2022 Dr. Sreenivas Madireddy vs. Maulana Azad Medical College & Ors. Page No. 3 of 7 therein other than for charges or costs and who is ready to pay or deliver it to the rightful claimant such other person may institute a suit of interpleader against all the claimants for the purpose of obtaining a decision as to the person to whom the payment of delivery shall be made or of obtaining indemnity for himself."
Conflicting Claim of two or more persons over the confidential files:
4. The main ingredient of Section 88 CPC is that two or more persons have adverse claim to one another over the same thing which is in possession of another person. In the present case, the things over which the two persons are staking their claim are the confidential files, but the question is whether the defendants No.2 to 7 have any claim over the confidential files. The Dean of Maulana Azad Medical College (MAMC) vide order dated 21.07.2022 (Annexure-P5) directed the plaintiff to hand over the charge to the defendant no.2 in terms of the said letter. However, the plaintiff filed the present suit seeking indemnity regarding handing over the confidential files of the defendants no.3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 to the defendant no.2.
5. It is observed here that once an official order is passed by the Dean in respect of handing over of charge, then no other person can claim any right over the files, which are to be handed over, while handing over the charge. The documents are official in nature and there should not be any inhibition to hand over those documents in the official capacity. If anyone, who are in custody of those documents, misuses those documents, then he will face the consequences in accordance with law.
6. In the present case, neither of the defendants, be it D-2 or D-3 to D-7, are entitled to have any adverse claim over the files. The defendant CS DJ 751/2022 Dr. Sreenivas Madireddy vs. Maulana Azad Medical College & Ors. Page No. 4 of 7 no.2 was appointed as the Director/Professor and Head, Forensic Medicine. He was claiming over the files in capacity of Director/Professor and the Head Forensic Medicines. On the other hand, the students/resident doctors, i.e. defendants no. 3 to 7, show apprehension that the D-2 will use their personal file to their disadvantage. But, it is again reiterated here that neither D-2 nor D-3 to D-7 can stake a claim over the files as they have to act upon as per the administrative direction of the Dean.
Maintainability of the present Interpleader Suit:
7. The Ld. counsel for the plaintiff has relied upon the following judgments and submits that the present suit is very much maintainable:
(i) The Groundnut Extractions Export Development Association Vs. State Bank of India, 1976 SC On Line Bom 123 : (1977) 79 Bom LR 1984, passed by Hon'ble Bombay High Court;
(ii) South East Asia Marine Engineering & Construction Ltd, 6 Waterloo Street, 1 Floor, Calcutta Vs M/s Oil and Natural Gas Corpn. Ltd, rep. by its Group General Manager, Regional Office No.8, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Channi-600008 and another, 2002 SCC OnLine Mad 842: (2003) 2 CTC 75: (2003) 1 LW 631 : (2003) 1 Mad LJ 519 : 2002 Supp Arb LR 433 (DB) : (2003) 4 RAJ 623, passed by Hon'ble High Court of Madras;
(iii) Asudha Singh Vs. R.B. Pahlaj Singh and others, 1974 SCC Online Del 156 : 1LR (1975) 1 Del 115 : (1974) 10 DLT 394: PLR (1976) 78 Del 1, passed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi; &
(iv) Jagdish Rai and another Vs Parminder Singh and others, 1990 SCC CS DJ 751/2022 Dr. Sreenivas Madireddy vs. Maulana Azad Medical College & Ors. Page No. 5 of 7 OnLine P & H 417: PLR (1990) 98 P & H 661, passed by Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court
8. However, it is noted here that the above mentioned judgments of the Hon'ble High Courts are distinguishable on facts of the present case as none of the defendants in the present case can claim any right over the confidential files and they do not have any adverse claim over one thing, which is in possession of a third person. The primary ingredient of the interpleader suit is missing in the present case.
9. Since, none of the defendant can stake claim claim over the departmental files, therefore, they are not having any adverse claim to one another. At most, the defendants no. 3 to 7 can file a suit seeking injunction against the plaintiff as well as the defendant no.1 & 2 to restrain them from handing over file to D-2. But, the interpleader suit in the present form is not maintainable.
Amicable Settlement:
10. However, during proceedings of the case, this court made efforts to settle this dispute amicably. The Dean of Maulana Azad Medical College (MAMC) and H.O.D of Forensic Medicine appeared before this court and submitted that the file may be handed over to the Dean. The defendants no.3 to 7 have agreed for the same. Since, the plaintiff as well as the defendants are the professor and Resident Doctors, therefore, this court is of the view that the present matter should be settled amicably between them.
CS DJ 751/2022Dr. Sreenivas Madireddy vs. Maulana Azad Medical College & Ors. Page No. 6 of 7 Relief:
11. Accordingly, the present suit is disposed of with directions to the plaintiff to hand over the charge consisting of confidential files to the Dean Maulana Azad Medical College (MAMC), who shall then exercise her administrative powers regarding handing over of the confidential files in accordance with rules and regulations.
12. With these observations, the present suit stands disposed of.
13. Decree sheet be prepared to the effect that files be handed over to the Dean Maulana Azad Medical College (MAMC), who shall then exercise her administrative powers regarding handing over of the confidential files in accordance with rules and regulations. No order as to the costs.
14. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Court Dated: 31st August, 2023 (RAJESH MALIK) Addl. District Judge-06 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi CS DJ 751/2022 Dr. Sreenivas Madireddy vs. Maulana Azad Medical College & Ors. Page No. 7 of 7