Dalbir Kaur v. Inderjeet Singh & Ors.

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the reporter or not?

3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?

JUDGMENT

1. By this order, I shall dispose of a petition under Section 24 read with Section 151 CPC preferred by the petitioner for transfer and consolidation of two suits pending before the District Court to this Court. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that suit titled as S. Joginder Singh versus Parmeshwar Kaur and others no.1445 of 1993 and the Suit titled as Jagjit Singh versus Inderjeet Singh and others be transferred to this Court and consolidated with Civil Suit CS(OS) 213 of 2007 on the ground that no prejudice would be to caused to any of the parties if the two suits were transferred to this Court. It is also contended that the evidence to be led in all the aforesaid suits was identical and this would avoid multiplicity of proceedings.

2. This petition is opposed by respondent stating that the present petition is misconceived and misuse of judicial process and is not maintainable. It is submitted that the Suit bearing No.25 of 2007 titled as Dalbir Kaur and others verus Inderjeet Singh and other was pending for the last 16 years and the petitioner herein was 2010:DHC:322 OMP 584.08 Dalbir Kaur vs. Inderjeet Singh & Ors. delaying the said suit. The suit was for permanent injunction restraining respondents from selling the property bearing no.22, Block-A, Lajpat Nagar-III, New Delhi. The suit titled Jagjit Singh versus Inderjeet Singh and other filed in January 2006 by the petitioner herein was in respect to property bearing no. 22, Block-A, Lajpat Nagar- III, New Delhi whereas the suit pending in this Court was in respect to property bearing no.22, Saman Bazar, Jungpura, New Delhi. Hence, not only the suits were in respect of different properties but also the issues involved were different and consolidation of the suits would serve no purpose and would prejudice the rights of the parties.

3. I have gone through the plaint of the three suits and the defence taken. I consider that since the suit pending in this Court is in respect of all together different property, though the parties are somewhat similar, the defence of defendants in different suits is also different and the points to be decided in respect of the two properties are different. Calling of two suits from District Court to this Court would in fact prejudice different parties and it cannot be said that the evidence in all the suits would be same.

4. I find no merit in this petition. The petition is hereby dismissed. No orders as to costs. January 20, 2010 SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA J. rd