MR. SIDDHAANT MOHTA AND ORS vs DELHI GYMKHANA CLUB LTD. AND ORS

Judgment text excerpt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 22.05.2025 + FAO(OS)182/2024 & CM APPL. 75479/2024, CM APPL. 75480/2024 MR. SIDDHAANT MOHTA AND ORS. ..... Appellants versus DELHI GYMKHANA CLUB LTD. AND ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellants : Mr. Amir Singh Pasrich, Ms. Mohanna Malhotra, Mr. Karan Bahmani, Advs. For the Respondents : Mr. Prateek Kumar, Ms. Raveena Rai, Advs. for R-1. CORAM HON’BLE MR JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON’BLE MR JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN JUDGMENT AMIT MAHAJAN, J 1. The dismissal of the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’), by the learned Single Judge in CS(OS) 224/2024, by order dated 18.10.2024 Signature Not Verified Signed By:HARMINDER KAUR FAO(OS)182/2024 Page 1 of 24 Signing Date:22.05.2025 19:32:01 (‘impugned judgment’), has led to filing of the present Intra-Court appeal by the appellants (plaintiffs). 2. The appellants’ right to use the facilities of Respondent No.1 Company was suspended by notice and letter dated 08.03.2022 and was subsequently terminated by order dated 31.03.2022 issued by Respondent No.1 Company. 3. The appellants challenged the validity of the suspension and termination letter in CS(OS) 224/2024. By the present appeal, the appellants challenge the dismissal of the interlocutory applications filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC, wherein the plaintiffs/appellants had sought interim injunction and stay of operation of the notice dated 08.03.2022 and the order dated 31.03.2022. 4. Certain other individuals had also challenged their respective notices and termination orders, which took away their right to use the facilities of Respondent No.1 Company, by filing separate suits. Their applications seeking i