Subhash Mendiratta v. Suresh Mendiratta

1. By way ofthese petitions filed under Article 227 ofthe Constitution ofIndia, petitioner is impugning the order dated IS''^ October,2014 passed in Suit Nos.919/13/08 & 920/13/08 by the learned Civil Judge, Central District, Delhi whereby the application filed by the respondent under Order XVIII Rule 1 read with Section 151 CPC was allowed. CM(M)Nos.ll03/2014& 1104/2014 Page 1 of[3] 2015:DHC:10804

2. Learned eounsel for the petitioner has submitted that Suit Nos.919/13/08 & 920/13/08 have been filed by Sh.Suresh Mendiratta, respondent herein claiming ownership in respect ofthe suit property as son oflate Smt.Geeta Devi.

3. The claim made in the suits was contested by the petitioner who was defendant inthe above eivil Suits by filing written statement.

4. On the pleadings ofthe parties following issues wereframed;-

(i) Whether the plaintiff has under valued the suit and the value ofthe suit property is beyond the pecuniaryjurisdiction ofthe Court? OPD

(ii) Whether the plaintiff has no cause of action and locus standi to institute the suit? OPD

(iii) Whether Smt.Geeta Devi executed the Will dated 08.02.2008 in favour ofSmt.Laxmi Devi,ifso,its effect? OPD

(iv) Whether the plaintiffis entitled to decree of mandatory injunction as mentioned in the prayed clause(a)and(c)ofthe plaint? OPP

(v) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to mesne profits, if so, at what rate and for whatperiod? OPP

(vi) Whether the plaintiffis entitled to decree ofpermanent injunction as prayed for in prayer clause(cl)ofthe plaint? OPP

(vii) Relief.

5. The grievance of the petitioner is limited to the extent that while allowing the application under Order XVIII Rule I CPC,instead ofasking the respondent/plaintiff to prove his case and stand on his own legs petitioner/defendanthas been asked to lead DE.

6. During the course of trial learned counsel for the respondent submitted that withoutprejudiceto the rights and contentions raised before CM(M)Nos.1103/2014& 1104/2014 Page2of[3] { < the learned Trial Court as well before this Court, respondent has no objection ifthe impugned order dated 18*^ October,2014is set aside andthe respondent/plaintiffis ready and willing to lead his evidence i.e. plaintiffs evidence first in SuitNos.919/13/08 & 920/13/08.

7. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent herein, Mr.Sunil Malhotra, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits thatthese petitions may be disposed of.

8. Since the respondent who is plaintiff in Suit Nos. 919/13/08 & 920/13/08 has prayed thatthe impugned order be set aside and he is willing to lead evidence first, the impugned order dated 18^ October, 2014 is set aside with direction to the respondent/plaintiff in Suit Nos. 919/13/08 & 920/13/08 to lead plaintiff's evidence on the issues settled by the learned Trial Court.