Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

2026 DAILYLAW 11157 (DEL)

GURBANI SINGH & ANR. v. DEEPAK SINGH

FAO(OS)/70/2026 · 2026-07-03

Renu Bhatnagar, Vivek Chaudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) 70/2026 GURBANI SINGH & ANR. .....Appellants Through: Mr. Rahul Shukla, Adv. versus DEEPAK SINGH .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK CHAUDHARY HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR O R D E R % 03.07.2026 CM APPL. 40433/2026 (Exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. The present applications stand disposed of. CM APPL. 40432/2026 (Delay in filing) 3. The present application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of delay of 66 days in filing the accompanying appeal. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the reasons assigned in the application, sufficient cause has been shown for condoning the delay. The present application is allowed and the delay of 66 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 5. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of. FAO(OS) 70/2026 & CM APPL. 40431/2026 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 07/07/2026 at 11:23:10 6. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act read with Order XLIII Rule 1 (r) and Section 104 (ff) and 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) against the Order dated 16.02.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in IA No. 4311/2026 under Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC filed in CS(OS) No. 367/2022. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and upon perusal of the impugned order as well as the material placed on record, we are of the considered view that no ground is made out warranting interference with the impugned order. Accordingly, there is no merits in the present appeal. 8. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to modify the impugned order to the limited extent of the costs imposed upon the appellant. The direction imposing costs of ₹50,000/- on the appellant is set aside, and it is directed that there shall be no order as to costs. 9. With above directions, the present appeal, along with pending application, if any, stands dismissed. VIVEK CHAUDHARY, J RENU BHATNAGAR, J JULY 3, 2026/bs/kz 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 07/07/2026 at 11:23:10