SH. VINAY JAIN vs SH. RAKESH JAIN & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~51 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) (COMM) 36/2025 SH. VINAY JAIN .....Appellant Through: versus SH. RAKESH JAIN & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rajesh Raina, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 16.05.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. REVIEW PET. 305/2025 & CM APPL. 29971/2025 (Stay) 1. By this review petition, the respondents in FAO (OS) (Comm) 36/2025 seek review of judgment dated 16 April 2025 passed by this Court in the said appeal. 2. We have heard Mr. Rajesh Raina, learned Counsel for the review petitioners. 3. Mr. Raina has advanced various submissions before us. Despite the fact that a detailed reply was filed to the appeal, running into eighteen pages, not one of the contentions that Mr. Raina has sought to advance today finds place therein. Though Mr. Raina sought to REVIEW PET. 305/2025 in FAO(OS) (COMM) 36/2025 Signature Not Verified Page 1 of 9 Signed By:AAKANSHA SHARMA Signing Date:20.05.2025 16:12:36 contend that these submissions were advanced before the Court during arguments, we have also checked our notes and find that no such submissions were advanced. 4. We do not see why we should even entertain these submissions in a review petition when they were never advanced either in the pleadings or during the arguments when the matter was argued. 5. We may also note that no written submissions were filed by the respondents either, before arguing the matter. 6. Nonetheless, we have, in the interests of substantial justice, heard Mr. Raina on the submissions that he has advanced. We find no substance in any of them, at least as would merit a review of the judgment passed by us. 7. Mr. Raina’s first submission was that the order passed by the learned Single Judge, though ostensibly