IN THE COURT OF SH.
LAL SINGH, DISTRICT JUDGE
(COMMERCIAL COURT), SOUTH EAST DISTRICT, SAKET COURT,
NEW DELHI
CS(COMM) NO. 352 OF 2025
IN THE MATTER OF:
AMBHA ELECTRIC STORE
(TAKE OVER BY A.N ELECTRICALS) …PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
NORTH SELECT ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. …DEFENDANT
INDEX
S.NO. PARTICULARS PAGE NO.
1. APPLICATION UNDER ORDER VII RULE
11 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908
FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT OF
BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT ALONG
WITH SUPPORTING AFFIDAVIT.
2. BOARD RESOLUTION DATED
3. VAKALATNAMA
PLAINTIFF
DATED: 14.07.2025 Through:
PLACE: New Delhi
MOHIT YADAV
(Advocate)
Chamber no.412, New Building,
Patiala House Court Complex,
New Delhi-110001
Email:-mohitrv27@gmail.com
Phone- 91- 9711940952
IN THE COURT OF SH. LAL SINGH, DISTRICT JUDGE
(COMMERCIAL COURT), SOUTH EAST DISTRICT, SAKET COURT,
NEW DELHI
CS(COMM) NO. 352 OF 2025
IN THE MATTER OF:
AMBHA ELECTRIC STORE
(TAKE OVER BY A.N ELECTRICALS) …PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
NORTH SELECT ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. …DEFENDANT
APPLICATION UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11 OF CODE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE 1908 FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT OF BEHALF OF THE
DEFENDANT
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the suit at the very onset is liable to be dismissed on the ground of
delay at this very initial stage itself. The cardinal principle for any
legitimate action for recovery of monies, if at all, is that the same should
be initiated within the statutorily prescribed period of limitation of 3
years from date when the right to sue accrues for the first time and
applying this principle in the present case, the Plaintiff has approached
this Hon’ble Court with an inordinate delay of __ years _ months __ days.
2. That the plaintiffs have not approached this Hon'ble Court with the clean
hands. It is submitted that the there is not business relationship of
Defendant with A.N Electricals. Thus, no debt of the Plaintiff.
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS:
3. The plaintiff have filed the present suit against the defendant for recovery
of Rs.16,77,359/- along with interest @ 18 pa on 31.03.2024. It is stated
that the plaint is liable to be rejected in accordance with the provision of
Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908 as the plaint time
barred and fails to disclose how the cause of action against the defendant
is within limitation.
4. That the Defendant does not recognize the Plaintiff as Defendant only
knows Mr. ___ who was proprietor of the Amba Electric Store and does
not recognize the locus of the A.N Electricals as there is no document
with respect to succession of the Amba Electric Store by A.N Electricals.
5. That as per ledger submitted by the Plaintiff and as per the pleading he
issued bills from 08.01.2019 to 18.03.2020 therefore, the time limit to file
the present money suit as per the law was till 18.03.2023 and in present
suit pre-institution mediation was filed on 16.05.2024 with a delay of __
days and suit was filed on 23.04.2025 with a delay of __ number of days.
6. That the Plaintiff in para no.17 of the Plaint has relied upon the order
dated 10.01.2022 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court for condoning
delay of ___ days in filing the present suit.
7. That the relevant para of the Suto Moto 3 of 2020 is reproduced below for
consideration:-
“In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period
between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022, notwithstanding the actual balance
period of limitation remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period
of 90 days from 01.03.2022. In the event the actual balance period of
limitation remaining, with effect from 01.03.2022 is greater than 90 days,
that longer period shall apply."
8. This clearly shows that the said extension period of 90 days extends to
those cases where the limitation was ending during the period between
15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 and it definitely does not apply to the present
case in view of the fact that the limitation for the same had lapsed way
back on 18.03.2020 itself. Therefore, here again the Plaintiff is trying
unlawfully to gain time on the ground of COVID - 19 extension by
misconstruing the well-conceived extension of limitation in that Order of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
9. The through the plaint it can determine when the right to sue first accrued
to the plaintiff i.e. 18.03.2020, and suit is filed on 23.04.2025, the plaint
is not within time. The suit must be instituted when the right asserted in
the suit is infringed, or when there is a clear and unequivocal threat to
infringe such right by the defendant against whom the suit is instituted.
(Dahiben Vs. Arvinbhai Kalyanji Bhansai 2020 SCC On line 563, Para
14).
10.The object of Order VII Rule 11 (a) is that, if in a suit, no cause of action
is disclosed, or the suit is barred by limitation under Rule 11 (d), the
Court should not permit the plaintiff to unnecessarily protract the
proceedings in the suit. In such a case, it would be necessary to put an
end to sham litigation, so that further judicial time is not wasted.
(Dahiben Vs. Arvinbhai Kalyanji Bhansai (2020) SCC Online, 563).
11.The whole purpose of conferment of powers under this provision is to
ensure that a litigation which is meaningless, and bound to prove
abortive, should not be permitted to waste judicial time of the court.
(Azhar Hussain Vs. Rajiv Gandhi 1986 Supp. SCC 315).
12.It is submitted that it is a settled principal of law that where the delay is
inordinate, consideration of prejudice to the other side will be a relevant
factor while condoning delay.
13.That in view of the submissions made hereinabove, the Plaintiff herein
/Applicant has miserably failed to make out any case whatsoever for any
relief in filing the present Suit to be dismissed on the ground of inordinate
and inexpiable delay itself, both with exemplary costs.
PRAYER
In view of the above mentioned facts and circumstances it is most humbly
prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be graciously be please t
order to: -
1. Reject the Plaint as provided for under the provisionof Order 7 Rule 11
of CPC 1908 in the interest of justice and.
2. Pass such order and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper in
the facts and circumstances of the present case.
PLAINTIFF
DATED: 14.07.2025 Through:
PLACE: New Delhi
MOHIT YADAV
(Advocate)
Chamber no.412, New Building,
Patiala House Court Complex,
New Delhi-110001
Email:-mohitrv27@gmail.com
Phone- 91- 9711940952
IN THE COURT OF SH. LAL SINGH, DISTRICT JUDGE
(COMMERCIAL COURT), SOUTH EAST DISTRICT, SAKET COURT,
NEW DELHI
CS(COMM) NO. 352 OF 2025
IN THE MATTER OF:
AMBHA ELECTRIC STORE
(TAKE OVER BY A.N ELECTRICALS) …PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
NORTH SELECT ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. …DEFENDANT
AFFIDAVIT
I, Yaspal Singh Chikara, S/o. Sh. Ahir Ranbir Singh Chikara, aged about 60
Years, Authorized Representative of M/s. North Select Engineers Pvt. Ltd.
having Registered office at: - First Floor,1521, Wazir Nagar, Kotla
Mubarakpur, New Delhi-110003, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as
under:
1. That the deponent is the Authorized representative of the Defendant
company in the above suit and is fully conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the case and is fully competent to swear the present
affidavit.
2. That our counsel, under our instructions, has drafted the accompanying
application under order 7 rule 11 of CPC and I approve of it to be are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge, belief and the legal advice
received.
3. That the contents of the accompanying application kindly be treated as part
& parcel of the present affidavit, whose contents are not being reproduced to
avoid prolixity and the same has been read over to me in my vernacular
language.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at New Delhi on this ___ day of _____ 2025 that the contents of my
above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
No part of it is false and nothing has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VAKALATNAMA
IN THE COURT OF SH. LAL SINGH, DISTRICT JUDGE (COMMERCIAL COURT),
SOUTH EAST DISTRICT, SAKET COURT, NEW DELHI
CS(COMM) NO. 352 OF 2025
IN THE MATTER OF:
AMBHA ELECTRIC STORE
(TAKE OVER BY A.N ELECTRICALS) …PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
NORTH SELECT ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. …DEFENDANT
KNOW ALL to whom these presents shall come that I, Yaspal Singh Chikara, S/o. Sh. Ahir Ranbir
Singh Chikara, aged about 60 Years, Authorized Representative of M/s. North Select Engineers Pvt. Ltd.
having Registered office at: - First Floor,1521, Wazir Nagar, Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi-110003
Above named Defendant),
The Defendant hereby appoints.
MOHIT YADAV (D/4106/2018) (Advocate(s))
Ch. no. D-812, Additional Building Complex, Supreme Court of India-110011
Email: mohitrv27@gmail.com
Phone- 91- 9711940952
(herein after called the advocate/s) to be my/our Advocate in the above-noted case authorize
them:-To act, appear and plead in the above –noted cause in this Court or in any other Court
in which the same may be tried or heard and also in the appellate Court including High Court
subject to payment of fees separately for each court by me/us.
To sign, file, verify and present pleadings, appeals, cross-objections or petitions for
execution review, revision, withdrawal, compromise or other petitions or affidavits or other
documents as may be deemed necessary or proper for the prosecution of the said case in all
its stages subjects to payment of fees for each stage. To file and take back documents, to
admit and/or deny the documents of opposite party. To withdraw or compromise the said case
or submit to arbitration any difference or disputes that may arise touching or in any manner
relating to the said case. To take execution proceedings.
And I/We the undersigned do hereby agree to ratify and confirm all acts done by the
Advocate or his substitute in the matter as my/our own acts, as if done by me/us to all intents
and purposes. And I/We undertaken that I/We or my/our duly authorized agent would appear
in Court on all hearings and will inform the Advocate for appearance when the case the case
is called. And I/We undersigned do hereby agree not to hold the advocate or his substitute
responsible for the result of the said cause. The adjournment costs whenever ordered by the
Court shall be of the Advocate, which he shall receive and retain for himself.
IN WITNESS WHERE OF I/We do hereunder to set my/our hand to these presents
the contents of which have been under stood by me/us on this ___ August 2025
Accepted subject to the terms of the fees.
Advocate Client
