Motor vs. Durga Builders Pvt. Ltd.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

• CS(OS) 612/2001 MOTOR & GENERAL FINANCE LTD. ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Ravinder Singh, Adv. for the Applicant in O.A. No.

versus

DURGA BUILDERS PVT. LTD. ..... Defendant Through: None.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK O R D E R % 31.08.2015

O.A. No. 323/2015

Vide order dated 16th July, 2015 learned Joint Registrar has dismissed the application bearing I.A. No. 4863/2015 under Section 151 CPC of the applicant-Surender Modi. Aggrieved by this order, applicant has filed this appeal.

In the application, applicant alleged that his affidavit, annexed with IA No.10723/2013, had been misused by tempering. It has to be enquired as to who had misused the same.

A perusal of the affidavit indicates that it has been signed by the applicant as director of the defendant no.2. Applicant is not a party to the present proceedings. It also emerges from the record that earlier plaintiff

$~34

had filed an application bearing I.A. No. 6892/2001 for impleadment of applicant but the said application was disposed of vide order dated 20th December, 2002 since M/s Sonal Developers Pvt. Ltd. was impleaded as defendant no.2 in a separate application.

The affidavit, in question, was annexed with the application being I.A. 10723/2003 filed by the defendant no.2 praying therein that injunction order be vacated. In fact, injunction order was even vacated.

Vide impugned order, learned Joint Registrar has held that applicant indirectly wants to achieve which could not be achieved by the earlier application of the plaintiff filed in the year 2001. I do not find any illegality and the view taken by the Joint Registrar. Admittedly, applicant has nothing to do in this suit for recovery between the plaintiff and defendants, and for this reason applicant had earlier opposed his impleadment. It appears that present application has been filed by the applicant since he has been summoned by the Economic Office Wing during the investigation of FIR lodged by the plaintiff regarding forgery and fraud relating to property bearing no. 11-12, Ring Road, Lajpat Nagar-IV, New Delhi.

As regards disputes involved in this Court, applicant has nothing to do with the same. Consequently, in my view, Joint Registrar has rightly

dismissed the application of the applicant.

Original appeal is dismissed accordingly.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

AUGUST 31, 2015 ga