$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) 56/2023, CM APPL. 22180/2023, CM APPL. 22181/2023 SMT SUKHDEEP YECHO .....Appellant Through: Ms. Kadambari Puri, Sr. Adv with Mr. Mayank Tripathi, Mr. Akshat Shukla, Ms. Muskaan Chawla and Ms. Tanya Singh Kaurav, Advs. versus SMT. CHARANJEET KAUR & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Goyal and Mr. Nitin Kalra, Mr. Rachit Gupta, Advs. for R-1 to 3 Ms. Maldeep Sindhu, Adv. for R- 5to7. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR O R D E R % 25.02.2025 1. The present appeal under Order XLIII Rule (1) (w) of the CPC read with Section 10 (1) of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966 seeks to assail the order dated 13.09.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in CS (OS) 57/2019. 2. Vide the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has allowed the application preferred by the defendant no. 5 being I.A. 6121/2019 seeking deletion of his name from the array of parties. The appellant, who is the plaintiff in the aforesaid suit has also assailed the subsequent order dated 09.12.2022 whereby the review petition preferred by her was dismissed. This review petition, we may note, was filed seeking review of the order dated 13.09.2019, which order was premised on the consent given by the plaintiff for deletion of the defendant nos. 5 to 7. 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 28/02/2025 at 12:39:55 3. Learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge is based on an incorrect appreciation of the factual matrix as there was no occasion for the appellant for having given her consent for deletion of the said defendants when a specific application had been filed by her to seek their impleadment as defendants, which application was in fact allowed on 20.05.2019 and that too after no objection was given by the learned counsel appearing for these very defendants. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent, however, seeks to support the impugned order by urging that the impugned order, being a consent order, no appeal would lie against the same. 5. Having considered the submissions of the parties, we are of the view that even if we are to accept the respondents’ plea that the appellant had given his no objection to the deletion of the defendant nos. 5 to 7, the effect thereof would be that in case the appellant succeeds in the suit, rights of the defendant nos. 5 to 7 would be affected without they being given an opportunity to be heard. Once it is found that the said defendants had on their own volition chosen to seek deletion of their names from the suit, the defendants/respondents may have themselves alone to blame for any adverse orders in the suit passed against them. We have, therefore, put to learned counsel for the parties to obtain instructions in this regard. 6. At request, list on 27.02.2025. REKHA PALLI, J RENU BHATNAGAR, J FEBRUARY 25, 2025/ab 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 28/02/2025 at 12:39:55