KAMAL KISHORE @ KAMAL MALHOTRA vs ARUN KUMAR MALHOTRA

Judgment text excerpt

$~54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 05th May, 2025 + CM(M) 752/2025 & CM APPL. 24380/2025 & CM APPL. 24382/2025 KAMAL KISHORE @ KAMAL MALHOTRA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate versus ARUN KUMAR MALHOTRA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rajesh Bhatia, Mr. Hemant Kakkar and Mr. Shivam Advocates along with Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) CM APPL. 24380/2025 (exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM(M) 752/2025 & CM APPL. 24382/2025 1. Petitioner is defending a suit for declaration and permanent injunction. 2. During pendency of the suit, defendant, with the permission of learned Trial Court, amended his written statement. 3. During further pendency of the suit, defendant moved an application under Order XIV Rule 5 CPC with request that in view of the objections taken in the amended written statement, let additional issues be framed. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 752/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:06.05.2025 16:17:27 4. Aforesaid application was allowed in part and request for framing of issues regarding valuation and pecuniary jurisdiction was declined, holding that no such ground was taken in the written statement. Learned Trial Court was also of the view that objections taken in the written statement was regarding maintainability on the ground of res judicata and not under Order II Rule 2 CPC and, therefore, no issue to said effect has either been framed. 5. The attention of this Court has been drawn towards amended written statement which does incorporate objections regarding valuation and pecuniary jurisdiction as well as qua order II Rule 2 CPC. 6. It seems that while considering the aforesaid application moved by defendant under Order X