Parmider Singh v. Narinder Pal Singh &ORS
$~46.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) No.1042/2017 PARMINDER SINGH ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr. Harpreet Singh Popli and Mr.
Deepak Diwan, Advs.
versus NARINDER PAL SINGH &ORS ..... Respondents Through:
Mr. Sanjay Singh, Adv. for DDA.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
O R D E R
% 20.09.2017 CM No.34354/2017 (for exemption).
1.
Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2.
The application stands disposed of.
CM(M) No.1042/2017.
3.
This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the orders (dated 21st July, 2017 and 26th August, 2017 in CS No.463/17 of the Court of the Additional District Judge (South-West), Dwarka Courts, Delhi) inter alia dismissing the application of the petitioner / plaintiff under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) and refusing to re-call the said order.
4.
Though the petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable against the dismissal of an application under Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC and the remedy of the petitioner / plaintiff is to prefer a Revision Petition under Section 115 of the CPC but de hors the said question I have enquired from the counsel for the petitioner / plaintiff that
CM(M) No.1042/2017 the admission, on the basis whereof the petitioner / plaintiff is seeking the decree, being only of respondent / defendant no.4 Delhi Development Authority (DDA), how can the petitioner / plaintiff be entitled to a decree on admission against the other defendants, impleaded as respondents / defendants no.1 to 3 herein, who have not admitted the case of the petitioner / plaintiff.
5.
The petitioner / plaintiff states that the respondents / defendants no.1 to 3 are pro forma defendants in the suit and he will withdraw the suit insofar as against the respondents / defendants no.1 to 3. 6.
The petitioner / plaintiff is at liberty to do so and after withdrawing the suit against the respondents / defendants no.1 to 3 may apply again to the Suit Court for decree on admissions against the respondent / defendant no.4 DDA.
7.
With the aforesaid observations, the petition is dismissed. RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 'pp'..
CM(M) No.1042/2017