GHANSHYAM KHOHAR vs MADAN MOHAN THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 17.12.2025 + FAO(OS) 19/2025 & CM APPL. 8604/2025 (Delay of 37 days in filing the appeal) GHANSHYAM KHOHAR .....Appellant Through: Mr. Mani Karan Sharma and Mr. Devvrat Pradhan, Advocates along with Appellant in person. versus MADAN MOHAN THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Akshat Sharma, Advocate for LR No. 1(b) of Respondent No. 1/Mr. Shiva Gupta (in person through video- conferencing). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR % JUDGEMENT (ORAL) ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. 1. The present Appeal, filed under Section 104 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 [“CPC”] read with Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966, challenges the Order dated 19.11.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in I.A. No. 45396/2024 in CS(OS) 366/2018, whereby the application under Section 151 of the Signature Not Verified FAO(OS) 19/2025 Page 1 of 7 Digitally Signed By:HARVINDER KAUR BHATIA Signing Date:20.12.2025 16:37:32 CPC seeking issuance of necessary orders and directions filed by the Plaintiff [“Appellant herein”], was dismissed. 2. The Plaintiff‟s suit for partition and permanent injunction is pending before the learned Single Judge of this Court. 3. The Plaintiff filed the said application seeking relief to install an iron grill in the suit property i.e. House No. B-38, Sarvodaya Enclave, New Delhi [“Suit Property”], for security purposes. The Plaintiff claims that he is living in the front portion of the first floor of the suit property. 4. It is stated that in between the constructed portion, there is a courtyard which is open from ground floor to top floor. The rear portion of the first floor, the Defendants have rented out, and which