Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 44 views

    Pushpa Order 1 Rule 10

    Uploaded by

    vrittijain0

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Pushpa Order 1 Rule 10

    Uploaded by

    vrittijain0
    44 views5 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    44 views5 pages

    Pushpa Order 1 Rule 10

    Uploaded by

    vrittijain0

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 5

    IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF MR. ANIL KUMAR PASWAN LD.

    DISTRICT
    JUDGE, KARKARDOOMA, EAST DISTRICT, NEW DELHI

    CS DJ ADJ NO. 348/2022

    IN THE MATTER OF:-

    SMT. PUSHPA GUPTA …PLAINTIFF

    Versus

    SHRI PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA & ORS. …DEFENDANTS

    NDOH: - 23.07.2024
    LDOH: - 30.05.2024

    INDEX

    S.NO. PARTICULARS PAGE NO

    1. APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 10 (2) READ


    WITH SECTION 151 CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 ON
    BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF FOR STICKING OUT THE
    NAME OF THE DEFENDANT NO. 2 IN THE CASE,
    ALONG WITH THE AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT.
    2. ANNEXURE – A

    DEFENDANT

    THROUGH

    JATIN SHARMA
    D/951/2012
    For Jurist & Jurist International
    (Advocates and Legal Consultants)
    E – 26, 2nd Floor, Greater Kailash-1,
    New Delhi – 110048
    M:9811881981
    New Delhi E-mail: www.juristansjurist.com
    Date [email protected]
    IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF MR. ANIL KUMAR PASWAN LD. DISTRICT
    JUDGE, KARKARDOOMA, EAST DISTRICT, NEW DELHI

    CS DJ ADJ NO. 348/2022

    IN THE MATTER OF:-

    SMT. PUSHPA GUPTA ……. PLAINTIFF

    Versus

    SHRI PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA & ORS. …… DEFENDANTS

    APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 10(2) READ WITH SECTION 151


    CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 FOR STRIKING OUT THE NAME OF
    THE DEFENDANT NO. 2/ SHRI SANTOSH KUMAR GUPTA FROM THE
    ARRAY OF THE PRESENT SUIT

    MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: -

    1. That the aforesaid case is pending adjudication before this Hon’ble Court
    being listed next for July 27, 2024.

    2. That the present matter pertains to the eviction and declaration of title of the
    said property bearing no. 27/260, Trilokpuri, Delhi-110091 to the petitioners,
    who is the legal heir of the deceased, Lt. Shri. Mani Ram Gupta. Essentially,
    the present matter is in respect of the mere eviction of the defendant from the
    property and for the declaration of the title of the property in favour of the
    Plaintiff. The contents of the suit may kindly be read as part and parcel of this
    application those are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

    3. That, at the outset, Respondent No. 2 is seriously aggrieved with it being


    arrayed as a party in the present petition. The Respondent No. 2, Shri Santosh
    Kumar Gupta, is not residing at the above-mentioned property. After the
    settlement before the Mediation Centre in the suit bearing No. 123/2012 dated
    04.08.2012 Respondent No. 2 had received the partition amount and had
    thereof evacuated the said property and currently residing at E-38, Rajiv
    Nagar, Begumpur, North-West, Delhi-110086. The copy of the Aadhar card
    and Voter Slip is annexed as Annexure-A for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble
    Court.

    4. Accordingly, it is submitted herein that Respondent No. 2 have no concerns


    whatsoever with the reliefs sought for in the present petition, or that of the
    outcome of the present matter. That it is trite that a necessary party is a person
    in whose absence no effective decree could be passed at all by the court.
    Whereas, a proper party is a party, who, though not a necessary party, is a
    person whose presence would enable the court to completely, effectively and
    adequately adjudicate upon all matters in dispute in the suit. (Reliance in this
    regard is placed on the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mumbai
    International Airport Pvt. Ltd vs Regency Convention Centre and Hotels Pvt.
    Ltd., (2010) 7 SCC 417).

    Clearly, Respondent No. 2 is neither a necessary nor a proper party in


    the present matter. It is neither the case where Respondent No. 2 could
    aid this Hon’ble Court in passing an effective decree nor the case
    where, in its absence, no effective decree could be passed. At the cost
    of reiteration, it is not even the case where the Applicant seeks any or
    disputes the claims in the present petition.

    5. That, it is also pertinent to mention that on 07.07.2015 a memorandum of


    settlement took place between petitioner and respondent no.1 had a settlement,
    in which it is clearly stated that the petitioner and defendant no. 2 and younger
    sister had already got their share through court.

    6. That the Respondent No. 2/Applicant has been unnecessarily made a party,
    being made to appear before this Hon’ble Court on occasions when the
    petitioners have themselves not appeared, against which costs have also been
    imposed upon the Petitioners. Despite orders, shockingly, no costs have been
    paid to date.

    7. That, therefore, as it is writ large that the Respondent No. 2 does not have any
    concern with the outcome of the present matter, it is humble prayed that it may
    kindle be deleted/striked off from the present proceedings by this Hon’ble
    Court.

    8. That the present application has been filed with bona fide and in the interest of
    justice. No prejudice whatsoever shall be caused to any of the parties
    concerned, however, grave prejudice shall be caused to the applicant/
    respondent no. 2, if the present application is not allowed.

    PRAYER
    In view of the aforesaid, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble
    Court may kindly be pleased to:
    a) Allow the present application by deleting/striking off the name of/discharging
    the Respondent No. 8 from the present petition, and
    b) Any other or further order which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper
    in the interest of justice may kindly be passed in favour of the applicant.

    Plaintiff

    THROUGH
    JATIN SHARMA
    D/951/2012
    For Jurist & Jurist International
    (Advocates and Legal Consultants)
    E – 26, 2nd Floor, Greater Kailash-1,
    New Delhi – 110048
    M:9811881981
    New Delhi E-mail www.juristansjurist.com
    Date [email protected]
    IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF MR. ANIL KUMAR PASWAN LD. DISTRICT
    JUDGE, KARKARDOOMA, EAST DISTRICT, NEW DELHI

    CS DJ ADJ NO. 348/2022

    IN THE MATTER OF:-


    SMT. PUSHPA GUPTA …PLAINTIFF

    Versus

    SHRI PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA & ORS …. DEFENDENTS

    AFFIDAVIT

    I, Santosh Kumar Gupta S/o Late Shri Mani Ram Gupta, Residing on, E-38 Rajiv

    Nagar extension, Begumpur, North West Delhi 110086, do hereby solemnly affirm

    and declare as under:-

    1. That I am the Respondent No. 2 in the captioned petition and being aware

    of the facts and circumstances of the accompanying application, I am

    competent to swear this affidavit

    2. That the contents of the accompanying application have been drafted by

    my counsel under my instructions explained in vernacular which are true

    and correct to my knowledge and based on records. The same are not

    repeated herein for the sake of brevity and may be read as part and parcel

    of this affidavit

    DEPONENT

    VERIFICATION:-
    th
    Verified at Delhi on this day of January, 2024 that the contents of above

    affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part of it is false and nothing

    material has been concealed therefrom.

    DEPONENT

    You might also like