Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.75 seconds)
Documents citing Shri Virender Kumar Garg vs Smt. Manju Garg on 24 September, 2009

Sh. Praveen Kumar vs Sh. Gopi Dargan on 22 May, 2013

3. The brief background of this case is that the plaintiff Suit No. 207/11 Page 1 of 7 had first filed a suit for possession and recovery of house tax which was decreed in their favour. The decision of the Trial Court was upheld by the first Appellate Court and is now pending consideration in RSA No. 168/2012 before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. There is however no stay of proceedings. The plaintiff then proceeded to file the present suit which is for recovery of mesne profits and damages. The defendant vide their application under Section 10 CPC had prayed for stay of the suit pending disposal of the RSA. This Court vide its Order dated 31.10.2012 had considered the submission and rejected it on the grounds that the present suit was distinct from the earlier case which was for recovery of property tax and for possession. It was observed that provision of Section 10 CPC would come into operation if the matter in issue was directly and substantially the same in the previously instituted suit between the same parties. This Court took note of the observation of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of Virender Kumar Garg V. Manju Garg, in CM (M) No. 409/12 vide which the Hon'ble Court had clearly observed that the suit for possession and claim for mesne profits are two distinct causes of actions and though it may be Suit No. 207/11 Page 2 of 7 open to the party to join in the claim on both counts, but the provisions of Section 10 CPC would not be applicable when two separate cases are filed for possession and mesne profits.
Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Praveen Kumar vs Gopi Dargan on 31 October, 2012

10. Ld. Counsel therefore reiterates his arguments that the prayers made in the two suits are substantially different. The First suit has already been decided and there is no order passed in the RSA that warrants stay of the present suit. Reliance is also placed upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of Virender Kumar Garg V. Manju Garg being CM (M) No. 409/2012. Vide the said decision, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has very clearly observed that a suit for possession and the claim for mesne profits are two distinct causes Suit No. 207/11 Page ....4 of 7 of actions. Though, it may be open to a party to join in the claim on both counts, but the provisions of Section 10 of the CPC would not be applicable when two separate cases are filed for possession and mesne profits.
Delhi District Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1