Delhi High Court - Orders
Shri Jagdish Singh Malik & Ors vs Delhi Development Authority & Ors on 8 September, 2022
Author: Anup Jairam Bhambhani
Bench: Anup Jairam Bhambhani
$~38
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) 424/2018
SHRI JAGDISH SINGH MALIK & ORS. ..... Plaintiffs
Through: Mr. Lalit Gupta with Mr. Siddharth
Arora and Mr. Priyansh Jain,
Advocates.
versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. ..... Defendants
Through: Ms. Shobhana Takiar, Advocate for
D-1.
Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, CGSC
with Ms. Aakriti Roy, Advocates for
D-2.
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak with Mr.
Sunil Kumar Jha, Mr. Akhtra,
Advocates for D- 4 and 6.
Mr. Rajesh Yadav, Senior Advocate
with Ms. Ruchira V. Arora and Mr.
Dhananjay Mehlawat, Advocates for
D-8 to 17 and 19 to 26.
Mr. Lalit Gupta with Mr. Siddharth
Arora and Mr. Priyansh Jain,
Advocates for D-61 to 70/as
applicants seeking transposition.
Mr. Sachin Jain, proxy counsel for
Mr. Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate for
D-38 to D-60 and D-71.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:SUNITA RAWAT
Signing Date:12.09.2022 CS(OS) 424/2018 Page 1 of 4
10:58:26
ORDER
% 08.09.2022 I.A.14666/2022 By way of this application under Order XXII Rules 3 & 4 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC') the plaintiffs seek substitution of the legal representatives of deceased defendant No. 62, namely Mr. Sandeep Malik, who is stated to have passed away on 13.08.2022, as evidenced by Death Certificate dated 23.08.2022 filed on record.
2. In the application, which is duly supported by affidavit, it is averred that deceased defendant No. 62 is survived only by his widow and minor son, both of whom are sought to be substituted in his stead.
3. Issue notice.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the defendants, as above, accept notice; and submit that they have no objection to the present application being allowed.
5. However, on a query raised by the court as to the stand of the remaining defendants, since there are 71 defendants in all, Mr. Lalit Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the applicant/plaintiffs submits that, as stated on oath in the application, the deceased defendant has left him surviving only two legal representatives, both of whom are sought to be substituted in the present matter; and considering that the application is purely formal in nature, service of the other defendants be dispensed with; and that, if any of the other defendants has any objection subsequently, that may be considered by the court, in accordance with law.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUNITA RAWAT Signing Date:12.09.2022 CS(OS) 424/2018 Page 2 of 4 10:58:266. In view of the averments contained in the application, and the submissions made, and considering that the defendants represented today, who are also family members of deceased defendant No. 62, have all given their no-objection, the present application is allowed.
7. The widow and the minor son of deceased defendant No. 62 - namely Mrs. Meenakshi Malik and Master Soham Malik - are impleaded as party defendants Nos. 62(a) and 62(b) respectively in the matter.
8. Let amended memo of parties be filed before the next date.
9. Application stands disposed of.
I.A.14667/202210. By way of this application under Order XXXII Rule 3 read with section 151 of the CPC, the widow of deceased defendant No. 62, namely Mrs. Meenakshi Malik/defendant No.62(a), seeks to be appointed as the guardian ad-litem of her minor son Master Soham Malik/defendant No.62(b),who is also the son of deceased defendant No. 62.
11. Issue notice.
12. Learned counsel appearing for the defendants, as above, accept notice; and submit that they have no objection to the present application being allowed.
13. Considering the formal nature of the application, and the fact that there is no dispute that the applicant, Mrs. Meenakshi Malik, is the mother of Master Soham Malik, the application is allowed.
14. Mrs. Meenakshi Malik impleaded as defendant No. 62(a) is appointed as the guardian ad-litem of Master Soham Malik/defendant No. 62(b).
15. Application stands disposed of.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUNITA RAWAT Signing Date:12.09.2022 CS(OS) 424/2018 Page 3 of 4 10:58:26 I.A.14665/202216. By way of this application under Order XXIII Rule 1-A read with Order I Rule 10 read with sections 94 and 151 of the CPC, defendants Nos. 61 to 70 seek to be transposed as plaintiffs in the suit.
17. Issue notice.
18. Learned counsel for the non-applicant/defendants accept notice; and seek time to file reply.
19. Let reply be filed within 06 weeks; rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within 04 weeks thereafter; with copies to the opposing counsel.
20. List for completion of pleadings in the application before the learned Joint Registrar, on 30th November 2022, the date already fixed.
21. List before court thereafter.
ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J SEPTEMBER 8, 2022 ds Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUNITA RAWAT Signing Date:12.09.2022 CS(OS) 424/2018 Page 4 of 4 10:58:26