SHRUTI MANAV SHARMA & ANR. vs SUNAINA SINGH

Judgment text excerpt

$~54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 02.05.2025 + C.R.P. 130/2025 & CM APPL. 26272/2025 SHRUTI MANAV SHARMA & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Anunaya Mehta & Ms. Kunika Champawat, Advocates. versus SUNAINA SINGH .....Respondent Through: Mr. Akhil Sachar & Ms. Sunanda Tuloyan, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral) 1. This Court had briefly heard both the parties on 01.05.2025 and passed the following directions: “3. The present Petition has been filed under Section 115 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as “CPC”] seeking to challenge an order dated 07.04.2025 passed by the learned District Judge-06 (South), Saket, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order”]. 4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Impugned Order is unreasoned and the learned Trial Court has proceeded to dismiss the Applications mentioned above in view of the fact that the Defendant No.1 has passed away. He seeks to rely upon Paragraphs 106 to 108 of the Impugned Order in this behalf which are reproduced below: “106. This Court has carefully heard and perused the submissions as advanced on behalf of the concerned parties. The fact pertaining to the demise of defendant no.1, coupled with the order dated 24.01.2025 as passed by The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, has forced this Court to look, and adjudicate upon the present applications from a different perspective. 107. It is no more res-integra that any order passed qua a dead person, is in essence a nullity, as the Court does not have jurisdiction over a person who is not alive. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL Signing Date:13.05.2025 C.R.P. 130/2025 Page 1 of 3 13:08:36 108. According