RUCHIKA PUGLANI Vs. AASNA DIGIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The impugned order dtd. 15/2/2022, passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge ("the learned ASCJ"), invokes Sec. 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) to stay the trial in CS SCJ 1421/2021 (Ruchika Puglani v. Aasna Digin) pending the outcome of CS ADJ DJ 482/2021 (Aasna Digin v. Pawan Hans Taheem ). Ruchika Puglani, the petitioner before me, is the plaintiff in CS SCJ 1421/2021 (the trial in which has been stayed) and Defendant 2 in CS ADJ DJ 482/2021. Facts

(2.) CS ADJ DJ 482/2021 was instituted by the respondent Aasna Digin ("Aasna") against Pawan Hans Taheem ("Pawan") and Ruchika Puglani ("Ruchika") who are husband and wife. Ruchika is the petitioner in the present petition.

(3.) Aasna claimed, in the plaint in CS ADJ DJ 482/2021, to be the landlord of Pawan and Ruchika in respect of the premises situated at 70/18, Second Floor, B Side, B-1 Extension, Sewak Park, Uttam Nagar, Delhi 110059 (hereinafter "the suit property"). It was claimed that Aasna had let out the said premises to Pawan and Ruchika vide lease deed dtd. 13/4/2019 for a period of 11 months at a fixed monthly rent of ? 11,000/-. The period of lease was to expire on 23/1/2020. Even after the expiry of the period of lease, the plaint averred that Aasna allowed Pawan and Ruchika to continue residing in the suit property on oral monthly lease, and that Pawan and Ruchika had agreed to vacate the suit property on seven days' notice.