Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19246 (DEL)

P.C.AGGARWAL v. SURENDER JAVA & ORS.

CS(OS)/413/2025 · 2026-09-23

Manoj Jain

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CS(OS) 413/2025 1 $~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010400542025 + CS(OS) 413/2025 & I.A. 15459/2025 & I.A. 26485/2025 & I.A. 29946/2025 & I.A. 33071/2025 SH. P.C. AGRAWAL .....Plaintiff Through: None. versus SH. SURENDER JAVA & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr. Rishi Sood, Mr. Gurjot Singh, Advocates for Defendant Nos. 1 & 3. Ms. Puja S. Kalra, Standing Counsel with Mr. Virendra Singh, Advocate for defendant No.4. Mr. Shashi Pratap Singh with Ms. Laqshyaa Saluja, Advocates for defendant No.5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN O R D E R % 23.09.2026 1. The present suit seeks partition, permanent and mandatory injunction. 2. When the present matter was taken up on 06.02.2026, learned counsel for defendant Nos.1 and 3 informed that the suit had become infructuous as the plaintiff had transferred the property in favour of defendant No.3. 3. Such fact was verified by the counsel for the plaintiff on 10.03.2026. 4. On 29.04.2026, learned counsel for defendant Nos.1 and 3 reiterated that in view of the abovesaid development, the suit had been rendered infructuous. It was contended that the suit had been filed by plaintiff seeking 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 25/09/2026 at 11:30:21 CS(OS) 413/2025 2 partition which was on the premise that plaintiff had purchased part of the suit property from defendant No.3 and since during pendency of the suit, the plaintiff had sold back such share in the suit property to defendant No.3, it was contended that the suit had become infructuous as nothing survived for any determination. 5. Fact, however, remains that there was no appearance from the side of plaintiff on 29.04.2026. The case was directed to be re-notified for today and on that date, in the interest of justice, adverse orders were deferred. 6. The situation remains the same today also, as there is no appearance from the side of plaintiff. 7. It seems that plaintiff has lost interest in pursuing with the present suit. The suit, along with pending applications, stands dismissed-in-default and for non-prosecution. MANOJ JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 23, 2026 st/sk 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 25/09/2026 at 11:30:21