$~82 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 303/2024 GEETA SHARMA .....Appellant Through: Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Varun Singh, Ms. Alankriti Dwivedi, Ms. Deepeika Kalia, Mr. Sudeep Chandra, Ms. Bhumi Sharma versus KANCHANA RAI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. D. Abhinav Rao, Adv. for R-1. Ms. Niyati Kohli, Mr. Pratham Vir Agarwal and Mr. Nilay Gupta, Advs. for R-2 and 3. Mr. Trideep Pais, Sr. Adv. with and Mr. B. Shravanth Shanker, Adv. for Applicant/Uma Devi CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR O R D E R % 26.08.2025 CM APPL. 52693/2025 [For rectification/clarification of orders dt. 20.08.2025] 1. The instant application, under Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has been filed by the Appellant seeking rectification/clarification of the Judgment dated 20.08.2025. 2. The Appellant had filed petition under Section 19 read with Sections 21 and 22 of the Hindu Adoption & Maintenance Act, 1956 [hereinafter referred to as „HAMA‟], which was dismissed by the Family Court. Aggrieved from this, the present Appeal was filed. 3. By the Judgment dated 20.08.2025, the Appeal was allowed, 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 28/08/2025 at 12:15:35 while directing the Family Court to make sincere endeavours for expeditious disposal of the application filed by the Appellant. In paragraph Nos. 9 and 10 of the said judgment, this Court has examined Sections 19, 21 and 22 of the HAMA in detail. 4. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that first sentence of the paragraph No. 10 confines the right of the Appellant to claim maintenance from estate derived from coparcenary property of her deceased father-in-law, whereas Section 22 of the HAMA grants maintenance from the estate, which does not use the expression „coparcenary property‟. Hence, a clarification is sought. 5. Learned counsel for the Respondent has opposed the prayer, tooth and nail, on the ground that such clarification will result in changing the judgment in totality, and will amount to review. 6. This Court has considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties. 7. The Family Court has only been requested to make sincere endeavours to decide the application. Once an application has been filed under Section 19 read with Sections 21 and 22 of the HAMA, the Court will consider the same in accordance with law. With these observations, the application is disposed of. ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. AUGUST 26, 2025/sg/er 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 28/08/2025 at 12:15:35