AAKASH CHATURBHUJ CHHABRIA vs HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISES INDIA PVT LTD

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 29.10.2025 Judgment pronounced on: 13.11.2025 + FAO(OS) 50/2025, CM APPL. 24727/2025, CM APPL. 61159/2025 & CM APPL. 61194/2025 AAKASH CHATURBHUJ CHHABRIA ...Appellant Through: Mr. Sandeep Choudhary, Adv. versus HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISES INDIA PVT. LTD & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Krishna Parkhani, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR JUDGMENT ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. 1. The issue which arises for consideration in the present appeal is whether the learned Single Judge was justified in holding that the cause of action against all Defendants was composite and, consequently, in declining to direct separation of trial or return of the plaint qua Defendant No.4 for presentation before the competent court at Mumbai. 2. The present Appeal, preferred by the Appellant/Defendant No.4, assails the correctness of the order dated 25.02.2025 [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order”] passed by the learned Single Judge in CS(OS) 223/2022, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the Signature Not Verified FAO(OS) 50/2025 Page 1 of 15 Signed By:JAI NARAYAN Signing Date:13.11.2025 12:02:03 Interlocutory Application being I.A. 5143/2024 filed by the Appellant under Order I Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as “CPC”] read with Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC and Section 151 of the CPC, seeking (i) separation of trial as against Defendant No.4, and (ii) transfer of the proceedings concerning him to the competent court at Mumbai. FACTUAL MATRIX 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are being referred to as they were arrayed before the learned Single Judge. 4. The Plaintiff instituted CS(OS) 223/2022 seeking recovery