Delhi High Court - Orders
Deepak Mukhi & Ors vs Fiitjee Limited on 12 March, 2026
$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 73/2026 and I.A. 2121/2026
DEEPAK MUKHI & ORS. .....Plaintiffs
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, Sr. Advocate
with Mr. Ashish Prasad, Mr. Vishal Kapoor, Mr.
Harsh Jain, Ms. Roshni Namboodiry, Advocates.
versus
FIITJEE LIMITED .....Defendant
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN
ORDER
% 12.03.2026 I.A. 2120/2026 (Application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 by the plaintiffs)
1. Mr. Gautam Narayan, learned Sr. Counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiffs at the outset informs the Court that the deficient court fee has been paid. He further contends that the provisions of Section 63(4)(c) of BSA have also been complied with. The statement is taken on record.
2. Mr. Narayan invites attention of the Court to the order dated 30.01.2026 vide which Local Commissioner was appointed by this Court to visit the suit premises and inventorize the goods lying there. The Commission has been executed and the report of the learned Local Commissioner is on record.
3. Referring to the report of the learned Local Commissioner, he submits This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 21:04:36 that, though the Local Commissioner was able to inventorize the goods and equipment lying in the basement, upper ground floor, second floor, third floor and terrace of the suit premises, however, there were certain areas in the basement and in the third floor, whose lock and key was not with the plaintiffs. Therefore, goods and equipment lying therein could not be inventorized. It is further mentioned in the report that no one was present on behalf of the defendant despite notice having been given by the learned Local Commissioner.
4. The present suit has been filed praying for decree of possession. The defendant was tenant in the suit premises and the lease deed dated 11.04.2018 was terminated, whereafter the defendant is continuing in the premises as unauthorized occupant. Mr. Narayan submits that the property is lying closed and the rent has not been paid by the defendant for the past more than one year and the dues on account of rent/unauthorized occupation is now more than Rs.1 Cr.
5. Mr. Narayan has also invited attention of the Court to the e-mails dated 15.08.2025, 16.08.2025 and 07.10.2025 written by the defendant to the plaintiffs seeking permission to remove their equipment from the suit premises. He submits that the said e-mails were also responded to by the plaintiffs requesting the defendant to remove their equipments from the premises.
6. Mr. Narayan further submits that a suit was also filed by the defendant before the District Judge (Commercial Court)-04, West District, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi being CS(COMM) No. 692/2025 assailing the notice of termination given by the plaintiffs. In the said suit following specific prayer was made in clause (e) of the prayer, which reads as under:
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 21:04:36 "(e) Direct the defendants to release the assets locked up in the demised premises "
7. He submits that in the said suit, statement was made on behalf of the counsel for the defendant (plaintiff therein) that they will remove their belongings to which, learned counsel for the plaintiffs (defendant therein) had given her no objection. The relevant extract from the order of 10.12.2025 passed by the learned District Judge (Commercial Court)-04 reads thus:
"She has further submitted that so far plaintiffs prayer in clause (e) is concerned, the plaintiff can remove its belongings within 15 days. Separate statement of the Ld. Counsel for defendant is recorded to this effect.
In view of non-payment of the court fees even after order dated 20.08.2025 within 15 days, the present plaint is liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 (c) CPC.
As far as submissions made by Ld. Counsel for defendant is concerned, plaintiff is at liberty to avail the same within 15 days under intimation and under acknowledgment in writing and defendant shall remain bound by the statement made on their behalf by their Ld. Counsel today."
(emphasis supplied)
8. In the above backdrop prayer has been made in the present application viz., to direct the defendant to forthwith remove all its assets, belongings, equipment, furniture and material from the suit premises.
9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances noted herein above, there is a strong prima facie case in favour of the plaintiffs. The balance of convenience is also in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendant. As evident from the Local Commissioner's report, the suit premises are currently in a state of disuse, and the defendant has failed to pay rent to the This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 21:04:36 plaintiff for the past more than a year.
10. Therefore, it is deemed appropriate to direct the defendant to forthwith remove all its assets, belongings, equipment, furniture and material from the suit premises comprising of basement, upper ground floor, second floor, third floor and terrace of the property bearing No. 13/35, Rohtak Road, Near Maharaja Agrasen Hospital, West Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi and hand over the physical and vacant possession to the plaintiff within a period of three weeks. Ordered accordingly.
11. The plaintiffs are at liberty to serve a copy of this order on the defendant since there is no appearance on their behalf despite advance service of the present application.
12. The Registry is also directed to communicate the order to the defendant.
13. Re-notify on 13.04.2026.
I.A. 2122/2026 (Application under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 151 CPC by the plaintiffs)
14. By way of present application, plaintiff seeks exemption from pre- institution mediation.
15. Notice was issued by the Court in this application to the defendant, and the same was served on the defendant on 26.02.2026. However, there is no appearance on behalf of the defendant to controvert the averments made in the present application.
16. While issuing notice, the Court as an interim measure had also appointed a Local Commissioner. Today as well, further interim directions have been passed, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 21:04:36
17. In view of the above, present application is allowed and disposed of.
I.A. 6306/2026 (Application under Order XII Rule 6 read with Section 151 CPC by the plaintiffs)
18. Issue notice to the defendant by all permissible modes, returnable on 13.04.2026.
VIKAS MAHAJAN, J MARCH 12, 2026/jg This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 21:04:36