Vichitra Prestressed Concrete Udhyog Pvt Ltd v. Naresh Chawla & Anr

O R D E R %

18.11.2025

¶1Petitioner/defendant has assailed dismissal of application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. The said application was filed, alleging that the Delhi Court does not have territorial jurisdiction to try the suit. It is contended by learned counsel for petitioner/defendant that on ground of territorial jurisdiction, even rejection of plaint can be sought. Prima facie, I am unable to accept this argument. However, learned counsel needs time to This is a digitally signed order. address in detail with case law. Further, paragraph 14 of the plaint clearly describes the necessary pleadings. At the same time, it is also the case of the respondents/plaintiffs that balance confirmation was signed in Delhi.

¶2At this stage, on instructions of his clients, learned counsel for petitioner seeks permission to withdraw both these petitions with liberty to file an application before the learned trial court for framing an additional issue as regards territorial jurisdiction of the learned trial court so that the issue be decided after evidence is adduced by both sides.

¶3Accordingly, both these petitions and the accompanying applications are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as sought.

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J NOVEMBER 18, 2025/as This is a digitally signed order.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 2793/2024 & CM APPL. 35164/2024 VICHITRA PRESTRESSED CONCRETE UDHYOG PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Prem Garg, Mr. Raghuvir Singh and Mr. Rinky Singhal, Advocates versus RAJESH KUMAR JAIN & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Amardeep Maini, Advocate + CM(M) 2794/2024 & CM APPL. 35166/2024 VICHITRA PRESTRESSED CONCRETE UDHYOG PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Prem Garg, Mr. Raghuvir Singh and Mr. Rinky Singhal, Advocates versus NARESH CHAWLA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Amardeep Maini, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA