PRANAV ANSAL vs VIPIN MALHOTRA & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~89, 90 & 125 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 22nd July, 2025 + CM(M) 1307/2025 & CM APPL. 43271-43272/2025 PRANAV ANSAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Madhav Khurana, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Malak Bhatt, Ms. Neeha Nagpal, Mr. Shreyansh Chopra, Ms. Sanjivani Pattjoshi and Ms. Kashvi Bansal, Advocates. Versus VIPIN MALHOTRA & ANR. .....Respondent Through: None. + CM(M) 1308/2025 & CM APPL. 43273-43274/2025 PRANAV ANSAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Madhav Khurana, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Malak Bhatt, Ms. Neeha Nagpal, Mr. Shreyansh Chopra, Ms. Sanjivani Pattjoshi and Ms. Kashvi Bansal, Advocates. Versus MEETU MALHOTRA & ANR. .....Respondent Through: None. + CM(M) 1295/2025 & CM APPL. 43151-43152/2025 PRANAV ANSAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Madhav Khurana, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Malak Bhatt, Ms. Neeha Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 1307/2025 & other connected matters 1 By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Date:24.07.2025 16:05:25 Nagpal, Mr. Shreyansh Chopra, Ms. Sanjivani Pattjoshi and Ms. Kashvi Bansal, Advocates. Versus SAURABH MALHOTRA & ANR. .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. All the three petitions have been taken up together as the grievance raised by the petitioner is, virtually, the same and similar. 2. On the basis of separate complainants filed by the concerned consumer(s), there was decree against M/s. Ansal HI-Tech Township Limited in all such three complaints. 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that when the complaint(s) were filed, no individual was made opposite party and, eventually, decree was also against the abovesaid company only. 4. On the basis of the abovesaid decree, separate Execution Petitions were filed by the concerned decree holders. The