Splendor Landbase Ltd vs Mrb. Promoters Pvt Ltd & Ors on 26 February, 2019

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Splendor Landbase Ltd vs Mrb. Promoters Pvt Ltd & Ors on 26 February, 2019

Bench: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw

$~6
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      CS(OS) 573/2016

       SPLENDOR LANDBASE LTD                            ..... Plaintiff
               Through: Mr. Sacchin Puri, Sr. Adv. with
                        Mr. Anirudh Bakhru, Ms. Mehak Tanwar,
                        Mr. Kamil Khan, Mr. Navroop Singh
                        Bakshi, Mr. Dhananjay Grover,
                        Mr. Dhan Sinhg & Mr. Sandeeep Kumar,
                        Advs.

                                Versus

     MRB. PROMOTERS PVT LTD & ORS                   ..... Defendants
                Through: Mr. Jasmeet Singh with Mr. Saurabh Tiwari,
                           Mr. Srivats Kaushal &
                           Mr. Devank Maheshwari, Advs. for D-1 to 3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
                              ORDER

% 26.02.2019 IA No.12823/2018(u/O.XIV R-2(2) CPC filed by defendants)

1. The counsel for the defendants seeks issues no.1 and 2 framed on 3 rd August, 2018 to be treated as preliminary issues.

2. It is argued that the plaintiff had earlier filed CS(OS) No.3370/2015 for recovery of the same amount as claimed in this suit and the plaintiff, during the pendency of that suit filed IA No.1221/2016 for withdrawal of that suit with liberty to file again and for refund of Court fees but when the said application came up before this Court on 27th January, 2016, the counsel for the plaintiff sought to unconditionally withdraw the suit and CS(OS) No.3370/2015 was dismissed as withdrawn and 75% of the Court CS(OS) 573/2016 Page 1 of 3 fees refunded to the plaintiff. It is argued that the plaintiff cannot again sue the defendants for the same relief and the suit is barred by Order XXIII Rule 1 & 3 of the CPC.

3. The Senior Counsel for the plaintiff contends that though the plaintiff withdrew the earlier suit but was pursuing a complaint with the Economic Offences Wing of Police against the defendants and in the course of the said complaint, a verbal settlement was arrived at between the parties, after the withdrawal of the earlier suit and in accordance with which verbal settlement, the defendants issued a cheque for Rs.1,00,00,000/- which was also dishonoured. It is thus contended that the present suit is on a fresh cause of action.

4. What emerges from the aforesaid arguments is, that the issues are indeed purely legal and are ordered to be treated as preliminary issues.

5. The application is allowed and disposed of.

CS(OS) 573/2016

6. The counsels have been heard on the preliminary issues also.

7. I have enquired from the Senior Counsel for the plaintiff, that once the plaintiff had unconditionally withdrawn CS(OS) No.3370/2015 earlier filed for recovery of the same amounts, for recovery whereof this suit has been filed, what was the consideration for the cheques for Rs.1,00,00,000/- which is claimed to have been given by the defendants to the plaintiff and/or for the promise to pay the remaining amount.

8. It prima facie appears that with the unconditional withdrawal of the other suit, the right of the plaintiff to recover the said monies from the defendants stood extinguished.

CS(OS) 573/2016 Page 2 of 3

9. The Senior Counsel for the plaintiff contends that the consideration was the withdrawal of the criminal complaint.

10. It again prima facie appears that even if it be so, the dishonour of cheque alone can be actionable and on the basis of oral agreement pleaded, which is denied by the defendants, the suit for recovery of any amount in excess of Rs.1,00,00,000/- with interest would not lie.

11. The Senior Counsel for the plaintiff states that arguments be deferred.

12. List on 6th May, 2019.

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

FEBRUARY 26, 2019 'ak' CS(OS) 573/2016 Page 3 of 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders