$~4 (19.09.2026) * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC011101072025 + CM(M) 526/2026 & CM APPL. 15907/2026 SHAHID ALI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. K. P. Singh, Mr. Vivek Tiwari and Ms. Himanshi Adhana, Advocates versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. R.K. Shukla, Adv. for R-3 Mr. Lalltaksh Joshi, Advocate for GNCTD CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL O R D E R % 21.09.2026 [File taken up today in view of Notification No.91/G-4/Genl.- I/DHC dated 18.09.2026] 1. Through the present petition, the petitioner/plaintiff assails the order dated 18.09.2025 in Civil Suit No. 120/2022 titled “Shahid Ali v. Deputy Commissioner” passed by the learned JSCC/ASCJ/GJ, Shahdara, Karkardooma Court, Delhi, whereby the learned Trial Court dismissed the application of the petitioner under Order VII Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”). 2. Briefly stated, in 2022 the petitioner instituted the underlying suit 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 23/09/2026 at 10:30:03 seeking mandatory and permanent injunction against respondent no. 3/defendant qua Plot No.315/2, Nahar Road, Opposite Jafrabad, Higher Secondary School, Delhi (“suit property”). The said suit remains pending since 02.02.2022. 3. During the pendency of the proceedings, respondent no. 3 purportedly attempted to dispossess the petitioner from the suit property and injured the petitioner’s son. Thus, the petitioner approached the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Karkardooma Court by moving an application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking directions for registration of an FIR against respondent no. 3. 4. Pursuant thereto, FIR No. 323/2025, P.S. Welcome, Delhi dated 27.04.2025 came to be registered against respondent no. 3. 5. Subsequently, the petitioner moved the subject application under Order VII Rule 14 of the CPC before the learned Trial Court seeking leave to place the aforesaid FIR on record. 6. Thereafter, the learned Trial Court vide the impugned order dismissed the said application of the petitioner observing that the events pertaining to the FIR occurred after the institution of the underlying suit and the FIR is accordingly irrelevant for the adjudication of the said suit. The concerned observations of the learned Trial Court vide the impugned order are reproduced hereunder for ready reference: “The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff seeking mandatory and permanent injunction against the defendants and the same is pending since 02.02.2022. The documents that the plaintiff seeks to place on record does not seem to be relevant for deciding the present case as the incident has taken place after the filing of the present suit. Accordingly, there is no merit in the ground taken by the plaintiff. As such, application u/o 7 Rule 14 CPC is disposed of as dismissed.” 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 23/09/2026 at 10:30:03 7. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has preferred the present petition. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate that the attempted dispossession of the petitioner by respondent no. 3 from the suit property, which is central to the said FIR, happened during the pendency of the trial and thus, it is essential that the said FIR be placed on record to arrive at a just decision. 9. Heard. Perused the record. 10. This Court is of the considered view that the document in question herein, the FIR registered at the instance of the petitioner against respondent no. 3, pertains to a subsequent event that is material to the lis between the parties. Both, the incidents central to the FIR as well as the underlying suit, pertain to the suit property and hence the said FIR is essential for a complete and effective adjudication of the underlying suit. 11. A perusal of the record also reveals the underlying suit is not at the fag-end but rather at the stage of Plaintiff’s Evidence. Therefore, no prejudice will be caused to respondent no. 3 in case the said document is taken on record. 12. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 18.09.2025 is set aside and the said FIR is taken on record in terms of the application of the petitioner under Order VII Rule 14 of the CPC. It remains open for the learned Trial Court to appreciate the said FIR in accordance with law at the appropriate stage. 13. It is made clear that this Court has not appreciated the merits of the dispute. 14. Accordingly, the present petition stands allowed in the aforesaid 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 23/09/2026 at 10:30:03 terms. 15. The present petition along with pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. AJAY DIGPAUL, J SEPTEMBER 21, 2026/ar/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 23/09/2026 at 10:30:03