Weizmann Forex Ltd v. Sushil Kumar Sharma & ORS
$~8 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ TR.P.(C.) 25/2016 WEIZMANN FOREX LTD ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Alok Singh, Mr.Deepak Shukla & Mr.Shailendra P.Singh, Advocates versus SUSHIL KUMAR SHARMA & ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr.Pradeep Kr.Sharma, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
O R D E R
% 07.10.2016 CM No.5933/2016 (delay) By the present application filed under Section 151 CPC, the petitioner seeks condonation of delay of 19 days in filing the accompany petition. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 19 days in filing the accompany petition is condoned. The application is disposed of. TR.P.(C.) 25/2016 1.
By the present petition, the petitioner seeks to transfer of the suit being No.329/2014, titled as Weizmann Forex Ltd. v. Lisa Impex & Ors., pending in the court of Sh.Ravinder Singh, ADJ, Karkardoom Courts, Delhi to the court of Sh.S.S.Rathi, ADJ, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi. 2.
The brief background facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a suit for recovery against the four respondents. Respondent No.1 has also filed a suit for permanent injunction, mandatory injunction and damages for Rs.15,00,000/- against the petitioner.
3.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the suit pending in the Patiala House Courts, New Delhi certain observations were made by the court that the two suits have been filed as a counter claim to each other and may be tried together. Hence, the present petition has been filed. 4.
The learned counsel for the respondents opposes the present prayer stating that the parties to the two suits are different inasmuch as the petitioner has impleaded three other defendants in his suit. He further submits that cause of action of filing of the suits is also different. 5.
The court of Sh.S.S.Rathi, ADJ, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi had noted as follows:
"In view of these facts, this suit perse, appears to be a counter claim to the money suit already filed by defendant herein against the plaintiff.
The factum of disbursement of foreign exchange by defendant company to plaintiff herein is not disputed by either side. Plaintiff is claim that money stood paid and he deserves return of his jewellery but as per defendant company there are dues of around Rs.15 lac.
In this background this court of the considered view that both these cases i.e.
one filed at District Shahadra, Karkardooma and the suit in hand are counter claim to each other and may be tried together.
At this juncture, Ld.counsel for defendant/applicant submits that he is not pressing this stay application here and would move Hon'ble High Court of Delhi for clubbing of both these cases as counter claim either at Karkardooma or at New Delhi District. Application stands disposed off accordingly." 6.
The court has come to the conclusion that two matters are as a counter claim to each other and had noted the submission of the petitioner that he will move to this court for clubbing of both these cases. 7.
As far as the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents is
concerned about the parties being different, the contention is misplaced. The memo of parties of suit filed at Karkardooma Courts shows that the additional parties are only the employees/proprietor/officials of the respondent Lisa Impex.
8.
In the light of the above, it would be in the interest of justice that the both the suits be tried and heard by the same court. No prejudice is caused to the respondents.
9.
Accordingly, the matter pending in the court of Sh.Ravinder Singh, ADJ, Karkardoom Courts, Delhi be transferred and heard by the court of Sh.S.S.Rathi, ADJ, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi who is hearing the suit filed by respondent No.1 being suit No.167/2015, titled as Sh.Sushil Kumar Sharma v. M/s Weizman Forex Ltd.
10.
Both the parties are directed to appear before the court of Sh.S.S.Rathi, ADJ, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi on 18.10.2016. 11.
With the above observations, the present petition stands disposed of. JAYANT NATH, J.
OCTOBER 07, 2016/v