Full Text
Translation output
-~ HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CM(M) 146/2010
V KASTHURI ...... Petitioner
Through Ms.Uma Aggarwal, Adv. with Mr.Pulkit Aggarwal, Adv.
CM(M) 146/2010
V KASTHURI ...... Petitioner
Through Ms.Uma Aggarwal, Adv. with Mr.Pulkit Aggarwal, Adv.
VERSUS
PGL SECURITIES & LEASING PVT LTD ..... Respondent
Through Mr.S.P.Sinha, Adv.
Through Mr.S.P.Sinha, Adv.
CM(M) 147/2010
PS RAVINDRAN ..... Petitioner
PS RAVINDRAN ..... Petitioner
VERSUS
CM(M) 148/2010
V KASTHURI ..... Petitioner
V KASTHURI ..... Petitioner
VERSUS
'---- r:;--;
2013:DHC:7567
2013:DHC:7567
CM(M) 149/2010
ARJUN RAVINDRAN
Through ..... Petitioner Ms.Uma Aggarwal, Adv. with
ARJUN RAVINDRAN
Through ..... Petitioner Ms.Uma Aggarwal, Adv. with
VERSUS
PGL SECURITIES & LEASING PVT LTD
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH
11.09.2013 C.M. No.13759/2013 in CM(M) No.146/2010, C.M. No.13758/2013 in CM(M) No.147/2010, C.M. No.13755/2013 in CM(M) No.148/2010, and ..... Respondent
C.M. No.13754/2013 in CM(M) No.149/2010 (all CMs u/s 151 CPC for modification of order dated 9th July, 2013, by petitioner)
The abovementioned applications have been filed by the petitioners for modification of order dated 9th July, 2013. In the said order, which was passed on consent, both the parties agreed that the evidence in all the suits as well as in the counter-claims be recorded by the Local Commissioner who would be appointed by the learned trial Court.
After hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners states that she would be making the request to the learned trial Court to appoint a Local
Commissioner or some retired ADJ for the purpose of compliance of the order dated 9th July, 2013. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection for the same. Let the counsel for the petitioners may make the
~------,---;--c-.,~.
·""·.;·:""'•,c;=·::,-,:,,,=:·:·'C/C?:,::""••-:~·- ... ,~, •. ~
..•. ,~~---:-;;;;.; ,,,.,.' ., ,••.•,,,.,.... ,.,,.,,,..,'""'"'·'"·"'·'·''·'·'·'· ~.
··""···c-;-c~----- \ request accordingly. Both the parties are also agreeable that the fee of the
Local Commissioner would be shared by both the parties in equal proportion.
As far as the present applications are concerned, I feel that no modification in the order dated 9th July, 2013 is required. The same are disposed of as such.
~s'6.Gu;{' SEPTEMBER 11, 2013
11.09.2013 C.M. No.13759/2013 in CM(M) No.146/2010, C.M. No.13758/2013 in CM(M) No.147/2010, C.M. No.13755/2013 in CM(M) No.148/2010, and ..... Respondent
C.M. No.13754/2013 in CM(M) No.149/2010 (all CMs u/s 151 CPC for modification of order dated 9th July, 2013, by petitioner)
The abovementioned applications have been filed by the petitioners for modification of order dated 9th July, 2013. In the said order, which was passed on consent, both the parties agreed that the evidence in all the suits as well as in the counter-claims be recorded by the Local Commissioner who would be appointed by the learned trial Court.
After hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners states that she would be making the request to the learned trial Court to appoint a Local
Commissioner or some retired ADJ for the purpose of compliance of the order dated 9th July, 2013. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection for the same. Let the counsel for the petitioners may make the
~------,---;--c-.,~.
·""·.;·:""'•,c;=·::,-,:,,,=:·:·'C/C?:,::""••-:~·- ... ,~, •. ~
..•. ,~~---:-;;;;.; ,,,.,.' ., ,••.•,,,.,.... ,.,,.,,,..,'""'"'·'"·"'·'·''·'·'·'· ~.
··""···c-;-c~----- \ request accordingly. Both the parties are also agreeable that the fee of the
Local Commissioner would be shared by both the parties in equal proportion.
As far as the present applications are concerned, I feel that no modification in the order dated 9th July, 2013 is required. The same are disposed of as such.
~s'6.Gu;{' SEPTEMBER 11, 2013
JUDGMENT