Delhi High Court - Orders
Ruchika Puglani vs Aasna Digin & Anr on 29 April, 2022
Author: C.Hari Shankar
Bench: C.Hari Shankar
$~103(Appellate)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CM(M) 398/2022 & CM No.20682/2022, CM No.20683/2022
RUCHIKA PUGLANI ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Anjum Kumar and
Ms.Priyanka, Advs.
versus
AASNA DIGIN & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Lalit Vasisht, Adv. for R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
ORDER
% 29.04.2022 CM No.20683/2022 (exemption)
1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application is disposed of.
CM(M) 398/2022 & CM No.20682/2022 (interim injunction)
3. This petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assails an order dated 15th February, 2022, passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge (learned ASCJ), Dwarka, whereby, exercising jurisdiction under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), the learned ASCJ has stayed the further proceedings in the trial of the suit pending before her on the basis of an earlier suit viz CS ADJ DJ No. 482/2021 (Aasna Digin v. Pawan Hans Taheem).
4. Prima facie, the view of the learned ASCJ does not appear to be in tune with Section 10 of the CPC. The earlier suit was a suit for Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 398/2022 Page 1 of 2 By:SUNIL SINGH NEGI Signing Date:06.05.2022 11:42:01 eviction, whereas the present suit is a suit for restraint against disconnection of electricity. Section 10 of the CPC proscribes a court from proceeding with the trial of a suit in which the matter in issue is directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the parties or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title. The parties in the subsequent suit included the BSES, which was not a party in the earlier suit. That apart, even the cause of action in the subsequent suit was for restraint against disconnection of electricity whereas the earlier suit was in the nature of an eviction proceeding.
5. Perhaps, the Court may have been justified in hearing the two suits together. However, prima facie, no case was made out for staying the trial of the subsequent suit under Section 10 of the CPC.
6. In view thereof, issue notice, returnable on 26th May, 2022. Notice be served on the respondent by all modes including dasti as well as through learned Counsel for the respondents before the learned ASCJ in CS SCJ 1421/2021.
7. Reply, if any, be filed within two weeks with advance copy to learned Counsel for the petitioner who may file rejoinder before the next date of hearing.
8. Re-notify on 26th May, 2022.
C.HARI SHANKAR, J APRIL 29, 2022/kr Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 398/2022 Page 2 of 2 By:SUNIL SINGH NEGI Signing Date:06.05.2022 11:42:01