$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 62/2025, I.A. 2389/2025, I.A. 2390/2025 & I.A. 2391/2025 NAVEEN BHATIA & ORS. .....Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Sachin Mishra, Adv. (Through VC)

versus RAJ BALA .....Defendant Through: Mr. Shiv Ram Singh, Adv., along with defendant in person.

Mob: 9990671101 CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

O R D E R

% 05.02.2026 I.A. 2389/2025 (For Exemption)

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Application is accordinglydisposed of.

CS(OS) 62/2025 & I.A. 2391/2025 (seeking condonation of delay in filing the suit)

3. Summons in the present suit are yet to be issued.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the defendant, on advance notice, submits that the present suit is barred by law, as the same has been filed under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (“Specific Relief Act”), under which a suit can be filed only within six (06) months from the date of dispossession.

5. He submits that as per the averments made in the plaint, the plaintiffs were dispossessed from the propertyin question in the year 2022. Therefore, the present suit filed in the year 2025, is barred bylimitation.

6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffs submits that the plaintiffs were dispossessed in the year 2022, and for which, the plaintiffs had filed a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act in October 2022, before the District Court-04, Dwarka. He draws the attention of this Court to the order dated 01^st August, 2024, passed by District Judge, Dwarka Courts, wherein, the application of the defendant herein under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”), was allowed in the following manner:

“xxxxxxxxx

24. In view of the conclusion reached, the application of the Defendant under Order VII Rule 11 is allowed only on the grounds of undervaluation of the relief and on the insufficiency of the Court Fees. However, in the interest of justice, the plaintiff is granted a period of two weeks from the date of this order to rectify the deficiency and pay the requisite court fees. Failure to do so will resultintherejectionoftheplaintwithoutfurthernotice xxxxxxxxx”

(EmphasisSupplied)

7. By referring to the aforesaid, he submits that since the suit was undervalued, the said suit was withdrawn, and filed before this Court.

8. He submits that the present suit has been filed along with an application, being I.A. 2391/2025, seeking condonation of delay of 667 days in filing the present suit before this Court.

9. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the defendant submits that earlier also, the plaintiffs had filed a suit, documents qua which have not been placed on record before this Court.

10. He submits that the plaintiffs have not filed a copy of order dated 07^th August, 2018 passed in CS 27180/2016, titled as “Naveen Bhatia & Ors.

Versus Raj Bala Garg”, nor a copyof the plaint filed in the said suit.

11. He further submits that copies of First Information Report (“FIR”), being FIR No. 79/2021, dated 03^rd February, 2021, FIR No. 676/2021, dated 31^st July, 2021 and FIR No. 678/2021, dated 01^st August, 2021, have also not been placed on record bythe plaintiffs.

12. Accordingly, the plaintiffs are directed to file the following documents in the first instance:

(i) Copy of the plaint filed in CS 27180/2016, titled as “Naveen Bhatia &Ors. Versus Raj Bala Garg”.

(ii) Copyof the orders passed in the aforesaid suit.

(iii) Copyof FIR No. 79/2021, dated 03^rd February, 2021.

(iv) Copyof FIR No. 676/2021, dated 31^st July, 2021.

(v) Copyof FIR No. 678/2021, dated 01^st August, 2021.

13. Let the aforesaid documents be filed by the plaintiffs, within a period of six weeks, from today.

14. The issue with regard to the present plaint being barred by limitation is kept open.

15. Re-notifyon 15^th May, 2026.

16. Interim orders to continue.

MINI PUSHKARNA, J FEBRUARY 5, 2026/SK