REGAL APARTMENTS P LTD Vs. LILAWATI GUPTA DECDT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge on 19th April, 2006 whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 14 (1) of the Limitation Act read with Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure, being IA NO.1912/2006 was dismissed and consequently, the suit being CS(OS) No.570/2005 filed by it for mandatory injunction, specific performance of an agreement dated 1.9.1993, damages and declaration was also dismissed.

(2.) The learned Single Judge considered the facts of the case and in the light of the same, considered the submissions made in the application filed by the appellant herein, plaintiff in the suit. The learned Single Judge has referred to the fact of the appellant filing a suit in the year 1995, in the District Court praying inter alia for a decree for permanent injunction restraining Smt. Lila Wati, who is also the defendant no.1 in the suit in which the impugned order is passed, from interfering in the construction being carried on by the appellant within the barsati floor of the suit property, namely, C-95, Anand Niketan, New Delhi. The said suit was numbered as suit No.18/1995. Vide order dated 8th November, 1995, it was held by the learned Senior Sub Judge that since no evidence was led by the appellant, therefore, the evidence of the appellant was closed and the suit was required to be dismissed and the same was, accordingly, dismissed by the learned Senior Sub Judge.

(3.) The learned Single Judge has also made a reference to the facts of Suit No.562/1995, entitled ?Rajinder Singh Versus Lilawati Gupta and Others?, as the appellant has prayed in its application for exclusion of the period w.e.f. 16.9.1996 to 15.4.2005, when the aforesaid Suit No.570/2005 was instituted by it in this Court, on the ground that it was prosecuting two applications for impleadment in the aforesaid pending proceedings which ought to be taken into consideration for computing the period of limitation. In the said suit, CS(OS) No.562/1995, an application being IA No.8648/1996 was filed in his personal capacity by one T.R. Anand, who is the Managing Director of the present appellant, under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for being impleaded as a party. The said application was dismissed by the learned Single Judge, vide order dated 24.1.2000. Aggrieved by the said order passed by the learned Single Judge, an appeal registered as FAO(OS) No.226/2000 was preferred before a Division Bench of this Court but the same was also dismissed vide order dated 1st May, 2000. Thereafter, in May, 2000 the appellant herein filed an application being IA NO.7275/2000, under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC seeking its impleadment as a party to the suit proceedings. Vide order dated 8.9.2000, the said application was also dismissed by the learned Single Judge. However, subsequently by an order dated 21.11.2000, passed in FAO(OS) No.305/2000, a direction was issued by the Division Bench that the application filed by the present appellant for its impleadment should be re-considered on merits as it was observed that the mere dismissal of the application of T.R. Anand on technical grounds, was not a legal bar on the company to move a fresh application for impleadment.