TILAK RAJ CHITKARA vs MANISHA JAIN

Judgment text excerpt

$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 25th March, 2025 + CM(M) 950/2022 & CM APPL. 21207/2023 & CM APPL. 65276/2023 & CM APPL. 24369/2024 TILAK RAJ CHITKARA .....Petitioner Through: Present in person. versus MANISHA JAIN .....Respondent Through: Mr. Nipun Katyal with Mr. Nishchay Johri and Mr. Surya Pratap Singh Rana, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. The challenge in the present petition is with respect to order dated 25.05.2022, whereby the learned Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal, while refusing to condone the delay. 2. Learned counsel for respondent submits that though the order in question does not call for any interference as the petitioner herein had miserably failed to show any sufficient cause, in order to put quietus to the matter, he would have no objection if, without prejudice to his rights and contentions and subject to imposition of heavy cost, the delay is condoned and a direction is also given to the learned Appellate Court to dispose of such appeal, as expeditiously as possible. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent also submits that he has already received the possession of the tenanted premises in question. 4. Keeping in mind the overall facts of the case and the gracious concession given by the learned counsel for the respondent, the present Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 950/2022 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:26.03.2025 17:54:58 petition is disposed of by directing that the application filed by the appellant Mr. Tilak Raj Chitkara under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 stands allowed and the delay in lodging the appeal stands condoned, subject to cost of Rs. 25,000/- 5. Let such cost be paid within two weeks from today to the opposite side before the le