ASHOK RANI vs KASHMIRI LAL

Judgment text excerpt

$~36 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 15.04.2025 + C.R.P. 259/2023 & CM APPL. 37647/2024 ASHOK RANI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Advocate. versus KASHMIRI LAL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sudeep Sudan, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral) CM APPL. 37647/2024 [Seeking condonation of delay in filing the Reply] 1. This is an Application filed on behalf of the Respondent seeking condonation of delay of 74 days in filing the accompanying Reply. 2. For the reasons as stated in the Application, the delay is condoned. 3. The Application stands disposed of. C.R.P. 259/2023 4. The present Petition seeks to challenge an order dated 05.06.2023 passed by the learned ADJ-02, South West, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order”]. By the Impugned Order, the Application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as “CPC”] filed by the Petitioner (Plaintiff before the learned Trial Court) has been dismissed by the learned Trial Court. 5. It is the grievance of the Petitioner that while deciding the Application Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL Signing Date:18.04.2025 C.R.P. 259/2023 Page 1 of 7 20:04:19 under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC, the learned Trial Court has in fact decided the objections taken by the Respondent, on merits of the case which is contrary to settled legal principles. 5.1 Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks to rely upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sampath Kumar v. Ayyakannu & Anr.1 to submit that the merits of the averments sought to be incorporated by way of an application for amendment are not to be adjudicated upon at the stage of decision in the application for amendment. 6. Learned Counsel for