MOHD. SALEEM vs JASPREET PURI

Judgment text excerpt

$~78 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 29th April, 2025 + CM(M) 780/2025 & CM APPL. 25379/2025 & CM APPL. 25380/2025 MOHD. SALEEM .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ambuj Tiwari, Advocate versus JASPREET PURI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Kamal Bansal and Ms. Monika Verma, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner is defending a suit which is commercial in nature. 2. After having filed written statement before the learned Commercial Court, defendant filed a separate suit seeking specific performance of the contract and consequential relief and he also lodged one criminal complaint with the concerned police authorities. He, accordingly, moved an application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC praying for incorporation of such subsequent events. His such request has been turned down by the learned Commercial Court vide order dated 01.04.2025 and this is how the present petition has been filed, challenging the aforesaid order. 3. Learned counsel for respondent/plaintiff appears on advance notice and submits that in order to ensure that there is no further delay in the matter and without prejudice to his rights and contentions, he would have no objection if Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 780/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:01.05.2025 16:21:06 the aforesaid subsequent events are permitted to be taken on record, albeit, subject to imposition of cost. 4. The Court has gone through the application moved by defendant under Order VI Rule 17 CPC whereby he wanted to incorporate Para-29A to Para-29D. 5. After having gone through the entire matter and also keeping in mind the gracious concession given by learned counsel for respondent/plaintiff, the present petition is allowed with direction that aforesaid