$~85 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 1524/2026, CM APPL. 45300/2026 & CM APPL. 45301/2026 MUNDE DISTRIBUTORS LLP .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Anand Sharma, Mr. Amit Tanwar and Mr. Raghvendra, Advs. with Petitioner Ram Diya, Munde Distributor versus BHAVYA GUPTA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Anshuman Upadhyay, Mr. Naseem Sheikh and Ms. Shubhangi Shashwat, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL O R D E R % 20.07.2026 1. Through the present petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the impugned order dated 05.06.2026, passed by the learned ASCJ cum JSCC cum Guardian Judge, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi in CS NO. CS/SCJ 674/2025 titled as “Munde Distributors LLP vs. Bhavya Gupta” whereby the petitioner/plaintiff was directed to value the suit and pay the requisite court fees within 40 days from the date of the impugned order. 2. The learned Trial Court in the aforesaid impugned order held that the petitioner/plaintiff cannot be permitted to seek possession under the guise of a permanent injunction. Accordingly, in terms of Order VII Rule 11(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the following directions were passed by the learned Trial 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 23/07/2026 at 11:38:38 “The submissions of Ld counsel for plaintiff clearly reveals that once the Ld counsel for plaintiff submits that they still seek relief qua prayer clause „b‟, it is evident that by pointing at page no. 79 of the plaint, the plaintiff has only tried to reveal an inference qua dejure possession. In the opinion of the court, this court has no hesitation to hold that since one cannot blow hot and cold at the same time, the plaintiff is not in defacto possession of the suit property and that the prayer clause „b‟ have been drafted skillfully wherein possession has been sought by way of permanent injunction and therefore, the plaintiff herein is directed to value the suit and pay proper court fee as plaintiff is not in possession of the property, in terms of Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, as plaintiff by way of permanent injunction is seeking possession. Plaintiff is directed to value the suit and pay proper court fees within 40 days from today” 3. After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff seeks leave to withdraw the present petition with a prayer that the period of 40 days, which was granted to the plaintiff/petitioner herein by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 05.06.2026 for valuation of the suit and payment of court fees be extended by another 10 days. 4. Having perused the impugned order and in view of the submissions made, the liberty sought by the learned counsel for the petitioner is granted and the liberty of 40 days, which was granted to the petitioner/plaintiff, be extended by another 10 days. 5. Accordingly, nothing survives in the present petition. 6. The petition, along with pending applications, stands dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed for. AJAY DIGPAUL, J JULY 20, 2026/AS/as 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 23/07/2026 at 11:38:38