Energy Infrastructure (India) Ltd & Anr. v. J S Malik & Anr.

Delhi High Court · 12 Feb 2020 · 2020:DHC:1033
Najmi Waziri
C.R.P. 267/2017
2020:DHC:1033
civil petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed the review petition challenging dismissal of a malicious prosecution suit, holding that acceptance of a final report exonerating the petitioner precludes review on grounds of incorrect translation or non-finality.

Full Text
Translation output
C.R.P. 267/2017
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 12.02.2020
C.R.P. 267/2017
ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE ( INDIA) LTD & ANR... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Trideep Pais, Adv. with Ms. Sanya Kumar, Adv.
VERSUS
J S MALIK & ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Respondent No.1 in person.
Ms. Shreya Kohli, Adv. for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI NAJMI WAZIRI, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 5377/2020 (Exemption)
JUDGMENT

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed-off. Review Pet. 60/2020 in C.R.P. 267/2017

3. This petition seeks review of the order of this Court dated 16.01.2020 on the ground that annexure 7 referred to in the order is not a final report and its translation from Gujarati to English was not correct. Therefore, the investigation in the case has not yet been closed. In other words, the petitioner contends that his exoneration is not yet established. This, however, is contrary to petitioner/plaintiff’s own claim in the suit which reads as under:- 2020:DHC:1033 C.R.P. 267/2017 “13. That during last quarter of 2015, the Plaintiff came to know from Hon'ble District Court Gandhinagar Gujarat that final Report in the above criminal case has been filed by prosecution vide. No.l-79 and accepted by the Hon'ble Court Inter alia exonerating the Plaintiff from the criminal offence stating further that the offence was attempted by some other person knowing affairs of the company thereby establishing the involvement of defendant no.3 as defendants admitted in para 8 of criminal complaint dated 16/11/2010 lodged with Gujarat Police by them. Copy of Final Report No.l-79 in Gujarati with English translation, complaint dated 16/11/2010, affidavit dated 26.10.2010 and letter dated 5.2.2013 from defendants are annexed as Ann.10 (Colly).”

4. The petitioner/plaintiff has filed the suit for malicious prosecution on his understanding and acceptance of the report that he has been exonerated of criminal charges and it is thereupon that he has based his suit for criminal prosecution. His having accepted the aforesaid position, calls for no review of the aforesaid order, which concluded that the suit was barred by the limitation.

5. The petition is without merit and is accordingly dismissed.

NAJMI WAZIRI, J FEBRUARY 12, 2020 kb