PINEVIEW TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED vs MITTAL EXTRUSION WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~64 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 05th May, 2025 + CM(M) 826/2025 & CM APPL. 26943-26944/2025 PINEVIEW TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dhruv Gautam, Advocate. versus MITTAL EXTRUSION WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Mittal, (Director) Present in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. M/s Mittal Extrusion Works Private Limited had filed a suit for mandatory injunction seeking direction to defendant No.1 to return his Mercedes Benz Car in the same condition as it was removed on 25.05.2022. 2. On the basis of one application moved under order XII Rule 6 CPC, the abovesaid suit was partly decreed by the learned Trial Court on 10.11.2022 and there was a decree with respect to the return of vehicle. 3. Feeling aggrieved, such order was taken in appeal by the petitioner herein. 4. When such appeal i.e. RCA SCJ No. 1/2023 was taken up by learned Trial Court on 21.02.2023, it also stayed the impugned judgment/decree. 5. However, in the subsequent orders passed by learned First Appellate Court, since there was no such further direction, when the learned Executing Court took up the execution, noticing that there is no further stay in the matter, it has directed the judgment debtor to hand over the vehicle within a period of one week, failing which, to bear cost of Rs. 50,000/-. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 826/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:06.05.2025 16:27:08 6. Such order dated 25.04.2025 is under challenge. 7. When asked, learned counsel for petitioner/judgment debtor No.1, informed that after the abovesaid order, he even moved an application before the learned First Appellate Court seeking extension of stay. However, the learned First