Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
TARA VITASTA GANJU, J
HARNAM SINGH – Appellant
Versus
MOHINDER PAL SINGH SAHNI – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the court reviewed the nature of orders under section 115 of the cpc. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. dismissal of adjournment request noted as the basis for appeal. (Para 5 , 6) |
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral)
CM APPL. 44083/2025 [Exemption from filing certified copies]
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. 2. The Application stands disposed of.
C.R.P. 210/2025 & CM APPL. 44082/2025 [Stay]
3. The present Petition has been filed under Section 115 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as “CPC”] seeking to challenge an order dated 25.03.2025 passed by the learned District Judge, Patiala House Court, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order”]. By the Impugned Order, an Application under Section 151 , CPC has been dismissed.
4. The maintainability of this Petition is a subject matter of challenge. It is no longer res integra that the provisions of Section 115 of the CPC cannot be invoked except where an order, if made in favour of the revisionist, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed C.R.P. 210/2025 Page 1 of 4 would have finally disposed of the suit or proceedings. This is set out in
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
