Delhi High Court - Orders
Shashi Bhushan Shugla vs M/S Scj Plastics Ltd & Anr on 9 February, 2022
Author: Prateek Jalan
Bench: Prateek Jalan
$~5 (2022 Cause List)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CM(M) 33/2020 & CM APPL. 1231/2020
SHASHI BHUSHAN SHUGLA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajiv Raheja and Mr. Deepak
Vuttsya, Advocates.
versus
M/S SCJ PLASTICS LTD & ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Pankaj Chaudhary, Advocate
for R-1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
ORDER
% 09.02.2022 The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.
1. The petitioner, who is arrayed as the defendant no. 2 in CS No. 533/2018 [SCJ Plastics Ltd. vs. M/s. Reliant Packaging Films Ltd.] filed by the respondent no. 1 herein, assails an order of the Trial Court dated 04.11.2019 by which his application under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for deletion of his name from the array of parties was dismissed. The petitioner's contention is that he has been arrayed as defendant in the suit only because he is the managing director of the respondent no. 2-M/s Reliant Packaging Films Ltd. [defendant no. 1 in the suit], against which the plaintiff had a claim.
2. According to Mr. Rajiv Raheja, learned counsel for the petitioner, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:10.02.2022 14:08:45 CM(M) 33/2020 Page 1 of 2 the plaintiff had no privity of contract with the petitioner in his individual capacity, and the only averments in the plaint in this regard are contained in paragraph 3 of the plaint. Mr. Raheja submits that even if the said averments are to be read as allegations of fraud against the petitioner, the pleadings are inadequate and particulars of fraud have not been given.
3. Mr. Pankaj Chaudhary, who appears for the respondent no.1/plaintiff, relies upon an order of this Court dated 01.10.2013 in CS(OS) 399/2001 [Mrs. Binu Anand Khanna vs. Ratan Tata & Ors.] and submits that the plaintiff will undertake to bear the costs of the petitioner in the event the plaintiff does not succeed in the suit as against the petitioner herein.
4. Learned counsel for both parties rely upon various judgments of this Court, but have neither filed the said judgments nor they are in a position to screen share them during the video-conference hearing.
5. Learned counsel for the parties are directed to place copies of the judgments upon which they seek to rely on record within two weeks.
6. List on 29.03.2022.
PRATEEK JALAN, J FEBRUARY 9, 2022 'pv' Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:10.02.2022 14:08:45 CM(M) 33/2020 Page 2 of 2