SH TRIBHUWAN NATH (DECEASED) (THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS) & ORS. vs RADHEY SHYAM MODI (DECEASED THROUGH LRS) AND ANR

Judgment text excerpt

$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 11.07.2025 + C.R.P. 249/2024 & CM APPL. 49413/2024 SH TRIBHUWAN NATH (DECEASED) (THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS) & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Naresh Kumar Beniwal & Mr. Nikhil Beniwal, Advocates. versus RADHEY SHYAM MODI (DECEASED THROUGH LRS) AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sarthak Gupta, Mr. Ankit Gupta & Ms. Arti Tyagi, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral) 1. The present Petition has been filed on behalf of the Petitioners under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as “CPC”] against the order dated 15.05.2024 passed by learned Civil Judge- 01, West, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order”]. By the Impugned Order, the Application under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC filed by the Petitioners has been dismissed by the learned Trial Court. 2. The maintainability of this Petition is a subject matter of challenge. The Impugned Order decides the Application under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC. An Application under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC is not amenable to the challenge under the revisionary jurisdiction of this Court. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HONEY ARORA Signing Date:14.07.2025 C.R.P. 249/2024 Page 1 of 4 15:32:42 3. 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, would have finally disposed of the suit or proceedings. This is set out in the proviso to Section 115 of the CPC below: “Section 115 – Revision The High Court may call for the record of any case which has been decided by any Court subordinate to such High Court and in which no appeal lies thereto, and if such subordinate Co