Delhi High Court - Orders
Manpreet Kaur vs Harjyot Singh on 4 June, 2021
Author: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw
Bench: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, Amit Bansal
$~13
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAO(OS) 19/2021
MANPREET KAUR ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.Paramjit Patwalia, Sr. Adv. with
Mr.Hrishikesh Baruah and
Ms.Radhika Gupta, Advs.
versus
HARJYOT SINGH ..... Respondent
Through: Mr.Amit Singh and Mr.Hari Shankar
Mahapatra, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
ORDER
% 04.06.2021 [VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]
C.M. Nos. 17987/2021 and 17988/2021 (both for exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions and as per extant Rules.
2. The applications are allowed and disposed of.
FAO(OS) 19/2021 and C.M. No. 17986/2021 (for ex-parte ad-interim stay)
3. This appeal, under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966, impugns the order/judgment dated 12th April, 2021 of the Single Judge, dismissing the application of the appellant/defendant for condonation of delay in filing the Written Statement to CS(OS) No. 444/2019 filed by the respondent/plaintiff.
FAO(OS) 19/2021 Page 1 of 64. One of us (Rajiv Sahai Endlaw J.), sitting singly, had occasion to deal with CS(OS) 444/2019 and during which hearing efforts were also made for bringing an umbrella settlement between the parties; however the said efforts had then not succeeded.
5. The counsel for the respondent/plaintiff appears on advance notice.
6. The respondent/plaintiff has filed the suit, from which this appeal arises, claiming the following reliefs:-
"(a) Pass a decree of permanent injunction restraining the Defendant and all her servants/agents/representatives from publishing/sending/circulating/posting/propagating any kind of abusive or threatening or intimidating or defamatory content, in any manner whatsoever, either by print or electronically, to the Plaintiff or the Plaintiff's relatives, friends, staff, colleagues and their spouses as well as other residents of Saket Court Residential Complex;
(b) Pass a decree of permanent injunction restraining the Defendant and all her servants/agents/representatives from visiting the workplace of the Plaintiff and more specifically from entering his court room and chamber and all other places where the Plaintiff has to be present in discharge of his official duties;
(c) direct the Defendant to unconditionally apologise to the Plaintiff;
(d) Pass a decree for damages in the sum of Rs. Two Crores and one Rupee only (2,00,00,001/-) against the Defendant and in the favour of the Plaintiff;"
7. We have enquired from the senior counsel for the appellant/defendant, the need for the appellant/defendant to contest the reliefs (a) and (b) above. We are of the view that the appellant/defendant, in her written statement FAO(OS) 19/2021 Page 2 of 6 cannot possibly have any justification for the acts as pleaded in the plaint and to restrain her from indulging wherein, reliefs (a) and (b) have been claimed.
8. The senior counsel for the appellant/defendant states that appellant/defendant denies indulging in conduct and acts, which she is accused of in the plaint and hence there is no cause of action for the respondent/plaintiff to claim the said reliefs.
9. We are however of the opinion that considering the fact that there is already an interim injunction operating against the appellant/defendant since 30th August, 2019 and considering the stature of the parties, there is no need for the parties to, at least in this suit, go through recording of evidence; the actions which the respondent/plaintiff, in the plaint accuses the appellant/defendant of, are per se such which cannot be permitted and qua which injunction ought to be granted inasmuch as such actions affect the right of advocates/litigants in the Court of the respondent/plaintiff as well as of other residents of the residential complex wherein respondent/plaintiff as well as other judicial officers have been allotted accommodation. It is thus felt that without prejudice to the respective contentions, a decree in terms of prayer paragraph (a) and (b) of the plaint be passed forthwith and which would then also not necessitate this Court to go into the question of correctness of the order refusing to condone the delay in filing the written statement.
10. As far as the reliefs (c) and (d) claimed by the respondent/plaintiff are concerned, we are of the view that considering that the parties are involved in litigation with respect to their matrimony on several fronts and in several FAO(OS) 19/2021 Page 3 of 6 Courts, the respondent/plaintiff, in the suit at least, is not entitled to reliefs
(c) and (d), especially if the decree in terms of prayer (a) & (b) is being passed immediately.
11. The senior counsel for the appellant/defendant as well as the counsel for the respondent/plaintiff state that the suit be disposed of in terms of paras 6, 7 & 8 of the ex parte order dated 30th August, 2019.
12. The aforesaid suggestion is found to be meritorious.
13. The senior counsel for the appellant/defendant also states that it be clarified that the said decree will not affect the claims of the appellant/defendant against the respondent/plaintiff in the complaint pending in the Courts at Chandigarh, under the Domestic Violence Act and in any other proceedings inter se the parties.
14. Once the decree as aforesaid is being passed without this Court recording evidence and merely for the reason that none can commit the acts as the respondent/plaintiff accuses the appellant/defendant of committing, we are of the view that the decree would not be proof of the appellant/defendant having committed any of the said acts.
15. Accordingly, we dispose of this appeal as well as CS(OS) 444/2019 from which this appeal arises, by passing a decree of permanent injunction, in favour of the respondent/plaintiff and against the appellant/defendant, restraining the appellant/defendant (i) from publishing/ sending/ circulating/ posting/propagating any kind of abusive or threatening or intimidating or defamatory content in any manner whatsoever, either by print or electronically, to the respondent/plaintiff or to the respondent/plaintiff's relatives, friends, staff, colleagues and their spouses as well as other FAO(OS) 19/2021 Page 4 of 6 residents of Saket Court Residential Complex; and, (ii) from visiting the workplace of the respondent/plaintiff and more specifically from entering the court room and chamber and all other places where the respondent/plaintiff has to be present in discharge of his official duties.
16. It is however made clear that the aforesaid order will not amount to a restraint in any manner whatsoever on the appellant/defendant taking/defending legal proceedings and/or taking any steps in aid thereof.
17. It is further ordered that the respondent/plaintiff also shall not publish/send/circulate/post/propagate any kind of abusive or threatening or intimidating or defamatory content in any manner whatsoever, either by print or electronically to the appellant/defendant or to the appellant/defendant's relatives and friends and shall not visit any place where the appellant/defendant works or visits in the normal course. However again, this would not amount to restraint in any manner on the respondent/plaintiff from taking/defending legal proceedings and/or taking any steps in aid thereof.
18. This decree has been passed for the reasons hereinabove recorded and shall not constitute evidence of any actions committed/not committed by the parties, in any other proceedings inter se parties.
19. The parties to bear their own costs.
20. Decree sheet in terms of above, be drawn up.
21. The counsel for the respondent/plaintiff states that vide order dated 22nd February, 2021 in the suit from which this appeal arises, CCTV footage of 11th April, 2019 has been summoned to the Court. He seeks preservation FAO(OS) 19/2021 Page 5 of 6 of the said CCTV footage.
22. The Registrar General of this Court is directed to ensure that the said CCTV footage received in this Court is preserved, to be available whenever summoned/requisitioned by either of the parties.
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J AMIT BANSAL, J JUNE 4, 2021 SU..
FAO(OS) 19/2021 Page 6 of 6