SURAJ KAPUR (DECEASED) THR L.R SANDEEP KAPUR vs SUBODH GUPTA & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 07th July, 2025 + CM(M) 1148/2025 & CM APPL. 38918-38919/2025 SURAJ KAPUR (DECEASED) THR L.R SANDEEP KAPUR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Siddharth Malik and Mr. Rohan Malik, Advs. versus SUBODH GUPTA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ankur Agnihotri, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. The petitioner takes exception to order dated 2nd May, 2025, whereby their application moved under Order VII Rule 10 and Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been dismissed. 2. According to the petitioner/defendant, the plaintiff has sought relief(s) of permanent injunction and mandatory injunction but has valued the suit at Rs.3,10,000/- and Rs.130/-, respectively, without giving any specific reason. He submits that though the learned Trial Court appreciated the abovesaid aspect, it still dismissed his application. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent appears on advance notice and submits that there is no illegality in the impugned order. He also contends that the intent of the petitioner is to, somehow, take a backdoor entry. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in all fairness, submits that the defence of the petitioner has already been struck off by the learned Trial Court and he also admits that the case is at the stage of final arguments. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 1148/2025 Page 1 of 3 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:08.07.2025 19:35:44 5. As per Section 8 of Suits Valuation Act, 1887 and Section 7(iv)(d) of the Court Fees Act, 1870, wherever a relief of injunction is claimed, the valuation given by the plaintiff has to be accepted as there is no specific valuation for such relief of injunction. It was in the abovesaid backdrop only that the learne