ASHA AGRAWAL & ANR. vs JAI CHARAN VERMA (DECEASED) THR LRS

Judgment text excerpt

$~225 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 22.05.2025 + C.R.P. 152/2025 & CM Appls.31607-09/2025 ASHA AGRAWAL & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Ms. Nandni Sahni, Adv. versus JAI CHARAN VERMA (DECEASED) THR LRS .....Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral) 1. The present Petition has been filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as “CPC”] impugning the order dated 10.09.2024 [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order”] passed by the learned Civil Judge, East District Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. By the Impugned Order, the learned Trial Court has allowed the Application under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the CPC filed by the Respondent. 2. The maintainability of this Petition is a subject matter of challenge. 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 Court appears (a) to have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or (b) to have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HONEY ARORA Signing Date:24.05.2025 C.R.P. 152/2025 Page 1 of 3 12:54:38 (c) to have acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity, the High Court may make such order in the case as it thinks fit: Provided that the High Court shall not, under this sect