SIDDHARTH JAIN vs NITIN JAIN

Judgment text excerpt

$~65 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 06th May, 2025 + CM(M) 854/2025 & CM APPL. 27426-27428/2025 SIDDHARTH JAIN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Manish Gupta, Advocate (Through VC) versus NITIN JAIN .....Respondent Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) CM APPL. 27427/2025 (exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM(M) 854/2025 & CM APPL. 27426/2025 & CM APPL. 27428/2025 1. Petitioner is defending a suit for recovery filed by his real brother. 2. During the pendency of the aforesaid suit, the defendant moved an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC praying therein that their father may be impleaded as party in the present suit. 3. Such request was made while claiming as under: - “It is submitted that the plaintiff and the defendant are brothers and the father of the parties Sh. Kamal Prasad Jain is a necessary party to the present suit. It is submitted that the money transactions in the family were done on the instructions of the father and he is well aware of the facts related to the present suit. It is submitted that the amount in issue in the present suit was paid by plaintiff in the loan account of the defendant wherein the father was also a guarantor and the said payment was done on his pretext as, the plaintiff owed money to the father, Sh. Kamal Prasad Jain.” 4. The suit filed by respondent Nitin Jain is very precise in nature. He claims himself to be an NRI and according to him, his brother had sought financial assistance from him and, consequently, he transferred Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 854/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:07.05.2025 16:30:00 a sum of Rs. 15 lacs in his account through online transaction. His sole grievance is that aforesaid amount ha