Delhi High Court – Orders
Mansi Aggarwal vs Manoj Choraria Since Deceased Through … on 20 April, 2026
Author: Amit Sharma
Bench: Amit Sharma
$~39
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ TR.P.(C.) 131/2025
MANSI AGGARWAL .....Petitioner
Through: Ms.Navita Gupta, Mr. Mukul Malik &
Mr. Aman Bhati, Advs.
versus
MANOJ CHORARIA SINCE DECEASED THROUGH LRS
.....Respondent
Through: Mr. Varun Dhingra & Mr. Shlok
Suden, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA
ORDER
% 20.04.2026
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition under Section 24 read with Section 151 of the CPC,
seeks the following prayers: –
“A. Pass an order allowing the present petition and directing the
transfer of the Commercial Suit bearing C.S(COMM) No. 141 of
2024 from Court of Ld. District Judge, Commercial Court; District
Central, Tis Hazari Court, New Delhi to Ld. Principal District and
Session Judge/Ld. Additional District Judge, Central District, Tis
Hazari Court, New Delhi and /or;
B. Pass any such further orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in
the present facts and circumstances.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the latter/plaintiff had
instituted the subject suit being C.S. (COMM) No. 141/2024 under Order
XXXVII of the CPC for recovery of money due from the
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/04/2026 at 20:51:28
respondents/defendants before the Learned District Judge, Commercial
Court-13, District Central, Tis Hazari Court, New Delhi.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that on 28.04.2025, the subject suit was
listed for final arguments and during the course of the proceedings, learned
Commercial Court entertained some doubts regarding the maintainability of
the subject suit as a “Commercial Dispute”. However, after hearing the final
arguments in part, learned Commercial Court listed the subject suit for further
arguments on the aforesaid issue on 16.05.2025.
5. On 16.05.2025, learned Commercial Court formed an opinion that the
subject suit is not a “Commercial Dispute”, and recorded the submissions
made on behalf of the petitioner/plaintiff. The said order reads as under: –
“The matter is fixed today for further arguments on the issue
of maintainability of the present suit as a commercial dispute before
this court.
Ld. Counsel for plaintiff states that in case the plaint is
returned back to plaintiff at this belated stage when the matter is
already fixed for final arguments, after completion of pleadings and
recording of evidence, then serious prejudice would be caus ed to
plaintiff as the proceedings of case may start de novo. Hence, she
requests for some time for approaching the Hon’ble High Court with
request to seek transfer of the case from this court to other
ordinary/general court being presided over by Ld. District Judge.
List the matter now on 05.07.2025 for above said
purpose/further proceedings.”
6. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in
view of the aforesaid order, petitioner has filed the present transfer petition. It
is further submitted that it will be expedient to get the subject suit transferred,
instead of getting it returned under Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC, as the same
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/04/2026 at 20:51:28
will cause grave prejudice to the petitioner for the reason that all the
proceedings, which have taken place in the subject suit will be washed away,
and the petitioner would have to start afresh, to seek redressal of his grievance.
7. Learned counsel of the petitioner relies on an order dated 29.07.2024
passed in the subject suit, whereby, it was stated that the “The present case
falls within the ambit of a commercial dispute as defined by Section 2(1)(c) of
the Commercial Courts Act and as per the mandate of the said Act, it is
imperative that a time bound schedule be made for trial and early disposal of
the case.”. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that on
22.04.2024, no issue with respect to maintainability of the subject suit was
framed and the respondents also did not dispute the maintainability of the
subject suit in their written statement filed before the learned Commercial
Court. In support of the present petition, learned counsel for the petitioner
further places reliance upon a judgment passed by the learned Coordinate
Bench in Namita Gupta v. Suraj Holdings Limited, 2024 SCC OnLine Del
143.
8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that it has been
falsely stated in the present petition that, if the subject suit is returned back,
all the proceedings which have taken place in subject suit, in the last 5 years
approximately, shall be washed away. Learned counsel for the respondents
further submits that the subject suit was filed in January 2024, and thus, the
subject suit is not ongoing for the past 5 years.
9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
10. In the subject suit, C.S (COMM) No. 141/2024, instituted by the
petitioner herein for recovery of the principal amount of Rs.25,00,000/- along
with the interest @ 12% p.a., before the learned District Judge, Commercial
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/04/2026 at 20:51:28
Court-13, District Central, Tis Hazari Court, New Delhi, following reliefs
were sought: –
“a) grant a decree in the favour of the Plaintiff, and against the
Defendants, to pay Rs.32,25,753/- (Rupees Thirty two lakhs
twenty five thousand seven hundred fifty three only);
b) grant interest pendente lite on the above amount in favour of
the Plaintiff and against the Defendants;
c) award the cost of the Suit in favour of the Plaintiff;
d) pass any other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in
the facts and the circumstances of the case.”
11. The subject suit, at the very first instance, was filed before the learned
Commercial Court. However, it is a matter of record that it was only when the
subject suit was at the stage of final arguments, i.e., on 16.05.2025, the learned
Commercial Court formed an opinion that the subject matter of suit is not a
“Commercial Dispute”. On a pointed query that whether the respondents
objected to the maintainability of the subject suit in their written statement
filed before the learned Commercial Court, learned counsel for the
respondents admitted that the said objection was not taken in their written
statement and the same came up only at the time of final arguments. Thus,
grave prejudice will be caused to the petitioner, if the subject suit is not
transferred, and it is returned back under Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC for
the proceedings to start de novo. The said view was also taken by the learned
Single Judge in Namita Gupta (supra), and it was observed and held as
under: –
“55. Where the plaint is returned under Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC, on
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/04/2026 at 20:51:28
its presentation before the appropriate Court of jurisdiction, the Suit
would be treated as a fresh Suit, and would have to start de novo, and all
proceedings before the earlier Court would be rendered a nullity. In this
regard, reference may be made to the judgement on the Supreme Court in
EXL Careers & Anr. v. Frankfinn Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd. (2020) 12
SCC 667.
56. To avoid the above consequence of loss of all proceedings that have
taken place before the earlier court, either of the parties may seek recourse
to Section 24 of the CPC, which empowers the High Court or the District
Court, on its own motion or otherwise, to transfer any Suit, appeal or other
proceeding pending before it for trial or disposal to any Court subordinate
to it; or withdraw any Suit, appeal or proceeding pending in any Court
subordinate to it and inter alia transfer the same for trial or disposal to any
Court subordinate to it and competent to try and dispose of the same. Sub –
Section (5) of Section 24 states that such power of transfer can be
exercised to transfer the Suit or proceeding from a Court which has no
jurisdiction to try it.
**** **** ****
58. The difference between Section 24 and Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC
is that in terms of Sub-Section (2) of Section 24, where any Suit or
proceeding has been transferred or withdrawn, the Court which is
thereafter to try or dispose of such Suit or proceeding may, subject to any
special directions in the case of an order of transfer, either retry it or
proceed from the point at which it was transferred or withdrawn.
Therefore, all proceedings that were undertaken before the Court where
a Suit was earlier instituted, though it lacked jurisdiction to try the same,
can be saved, and the Suit on its transfer can be proceeded from the point
at which it was transferred.
59. In Mahesh Gupta (Supra), a Division Bench of this Court was
considering a challenge to an order returning the plaint on the ground of
lack of pecuniary jurisdiction to be filed before an appropriate Court
having pecuniary jurisdiction over it. The Court, while upholding the
order passed by the learned Single Judge therein, directed that instead of
the return of the plaint, the Suit be transferred to the competent Court of
civil jurisdiction. The Court observed as under: –
“11. During the course of hearing of the appeal, the counsel
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/04/2026 at 20:51:28
for the appellant/plaintiff contended that the appellant will
be caused grave prejudice if the order returning the plaint is
sustained in as much as considerable evidence has already
been recorded in the suit and, there was also an order of
injunction against the respondents/defendants by the consent
of the counsel for the parties. Taking into account the
considerable time invested by this court in this suit, we have
decided to suo moto exercise our powers under Section 24(1)
read with Section 24(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
and instead of the order returning the plaint as passed by the
learned Single Judge, we modify the order of the learned
Single Judge and direct that, in the facts of the case, the suit
itself be transferred to the competent court of civil
jurisdiction. The effect of exercising of powers under Section
24 CPC would mean that the suit would be taken up by the
transferee court from the stage at which it was pending
before the impugned order dated 16.2.2009 was passed. The
learned counsel for the respondents has stated that the
respondents wanted to move an application for vacation of
the interim order of injunction, but, which he did not do in as
much as the matter was heard on the aspect of the lack of
pecuniary jurisdiction of the court. Therefore, while
directing the transfer of the suit, we further order that the
interim order of injunction operating against the respondent
in the suit will continue only till the date when the matter is
taken up on the first date by the concerned Civil Judge. The
Civil Judge will decide afresh the issue of grant or denial of
an ad interim/ex-parte injunction on the first date and he will
also decide expeditiously, and preferably within four weeks
from the first hearing, the injunction application a s filed by
the plaintiff in the suit. The learned Single Judge should take
up the issue of granting or denying of injunction (ex parte/ad
interim or pendent lite) entirely uninfluenced by the any
observations of this court or the fact that earlier an
injunction order was passed by the consent of the parties.
60. Therefore, once it is accepted that a Suit, which though relates to a
Commercial Dispute of a Specified Amount, is filed as an ordinary Suit
before a Civil Court, the plaint, under Order VII Rule 10 CPC, shall be
returned to the plaintiff to present the same before the Commercial Court
of appropriate jurisdiction, equally, either of the parties may invoke theThis is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/04/2026 at 20:51:28
provisions of Section 24 of the CPC to seek transfer of such a Suit.”
12. In these circumstances, if the subject matter of dispute is returned under
Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC for presenting the same before the Court of
competent jurisdiction and the proceedings are started afresh to seek redressal
of grievance, which is already a subject matter of dispute and is at the stage
of final arguments in the subject suit i.e. C.S.(COMM) 141/2024, it would
cause undue hardship to the petitioner/plaintiff. Therefore, it will be in the
interest of the justice, that the subject suit be tried and proceeded by the
learned Transferee Court from the stage, it is being transferred. Further, no
prejudice will be caused to the respondents/defendants if the subject suit is
transferred.
13. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the present case, the
subject suit pending before the Court of learned District Judge, Commercial
Court, District Central, Tis Hazari Court, New Delhi, is transferred to the
learned Principal District and Session Judge, Central District, Tis Hazari
Court, New Delhi, who shall assign the same to the Court of competent
jurisdiction. Needless to state that the Transferee Court shall proceed with the
subject suit from the stage it is being transferred.
14. In view thereof, the present petition is allowed and disposed of
accordingly.
15. Let the records of C.S.(COMM) 141/2024 pending before the Court of
learned District Judge, Commercial Court, District Central, Tis Hazari Court,
New Delhi, be transferred to the concerned learned Transferee Court, within
a period of 10 days from today. Parties are directed to appear before the
concerned learned Court accordingly.
16. Copy of the order be sent to learned District Judge, Commercial Court,
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/04/2026 at 20:51:28
District Central, Tis Hazari Court, New Delhi, and learned Principal District
and Session Judge, Central District, Tis Hazari Court, New Delhi, for
necessary information and compliance.
17. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
18. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court, forthwith.
AMIT SHARMA, J
APRIL 20, 2026/sg
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/04/2026 at 20:51:28
