MANOJ BABBAR & ANR. vs DR. ER. RAJAINDERR JAINA & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~75 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 18th July, 2025 + CM(M) 933/2025 & CM APPL. 30527-30528/2025 MANOJ BABBAR & ANR. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nimish Chib, Advocate. versus DR. ER. RAJAINDERR JAINA & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Aggarwal, Advocate. Ms. Harita Mehta, Advocate for MCD. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioners are defendant Nos. 2 and 3 before the learned Trial Court take exception to order dated 24.04.2025 whereby their application has been dismissed by learned Trial Court and it has refused to interfere with its previous order dated 20.03.2024 whereby their right to file written statement was closed. 2. The suit in question seeks permanent and mandatory injunction and also damages/ mesne profits. 3. Plaintiff happens to be the father of the defendant No.1. 4. As far as defendant No.1 is concerned, his written statement has been taken on record. 5. Learned counsel for defendant Nos. 2 and 3 submits that his case was, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 933/2025 1 By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Date:21.07.2025 14:31:33 virtually, similar to defendant No.1 and even defendant No.1 had not received the complete set of documents and when his counsel appeared before the learned Trial Court on 20.03.2024 and made a complaint in this regard, learned Trial Court treated defendant No.1 differently, and rather provided him with the complete set of plaint and annexures from the judicial file and permitted him to even take photographs of some of the pages from the judicial file and, thereafter, directed him to file written statement within a period of 30 days. 6. It is argued that the case of defendant Nos.2 and 3 was also similar as they had not received the complete plaint and annexures,