KISHAN LAL BHANDULA vs SUSHIL BHANDULA

Judgment text excerpt

$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 24th January, 2025 + C.R.P. 120/2022, CM APPL. 36778/2022, CM APPL. 36779/2022 & CM APPL. 42906/2022 KISHAN LAL BHANDULA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rishabh Kapur, Adv. along with petitioner in person. versus SUSHIL BHANDULA .....Respondent Through: Mr. J.C. Mahindro, Adv. through V.C. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN AMIT MAHAJAN, J. C.R.P. 120/2022 & CM APPL. 36779/2022 1. CM APPL. 36779/2022 is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of delay of 1327 days in filing the accompanying petition against the order dated 01.10.2018 (hereafter ‘impugned order’) passed by the learned Additional District Judge (‘ADJ’), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in CS No. 17126/2016. 2. By impugned order, the learned ADJ allowed the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff and decreed the recovery of possession in favour of the respondent/plaintiff in respect of the suit property being 2 rooms on 1st floor, XI/3699-3701, Netaji Signature Not VerifiedSubhash Marg, Darya Ganj, New Delhi admeasuring 485.22 Signed By:DEEPANSHU C.R.P. 120/2022 Page 1 of 6 Signing Date:14.02.2025 16:46:13 square feet. 3. It is stated that parties are real brothers. The learned counsel for the applicant, while making an effort to justify the delay, submits that soon after the passing of the impugned order, the mother of the parties passed away on 30.12.2018. He submits that during the course of the funeral rituals, the parties decided that they would make an endeavour to settle the disputes inter se. 4. He submits that the respondent, however, on 02.02.2019 filed execution proceedings against the impugned order, and the same is pending adjudication. He submits that thereafter during the proceedings emanating from the