Delay Excused: Court Dismisses Petition, Upholds Judgment on Application Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC 1908.Seeking rejection of plaint - Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - it was held by Delhi High Court that there is no merit whatsoever in the application of the applicant/defendant no.2 under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC. It has been filed only to delay the proceedings in the suit - HELD THAT:- There are no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and hence, the special leave petition is dismissed. The observations/findings recorded in the impugned judgment should be read as ... ... ... Issues involved: Delay condonation, interference with impugned judgment, observations/findings in impugned judgment, disposal of application u/r Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

In the present case, the Supreme Court, comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.V.N. Bhatti, first condoned the delay. The Court then decided not to interfere with the impugned judgment, resulting in the dismissal of the special leave petition. However, it was specifically noted that the observations and findings in the impugned judgment are to be construed as limited and essential for the resolution of the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Any pending application(s) were directed to be disposed of accordingly. Seeking rejection of plaint - Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - it was held by Delhi High Court that there is no merit whatsoever in the application of the applicant/defendant no.2 under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC. It has been filed only to delay the proceedings in the suit - HELD THAT:- There are no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and hence, the special leave petition is dismissed. The observations/findings recorded in the impugned judgment should be read as confined and necessary for the disposal of the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Vipan Kumar Sharma Versus Toshiaki Aiba & Anr.
Insolvency and Bankruptcy
2023 (10) TMI 1394 - SC Order - TMI
SUPREME COURT - SC
Dated:- 20-10-2023
Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 20381/2023 - -
Insolvency & Bankruptcy
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjiv Khanna And Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.V.N. Bhatti For the Petitioner : Mr. S. Muralidhar, Sr. Adv., Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR, Mr. Shashank Garg, Adv., Mr. Sidhant Garg, Adv. For the Respondent : None. ORDER 1. Delay condoned. 2. We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and hence, the special leave petition is dismissed. We, however, observe that the observations/findings recorded in the impugned judgment should be read as confined and necessary for the disposal of the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 3. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgements, Orders