SH INDERJEET SINGH BINDRA vs SMT RAMESH KUMARI & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 06.10.2025 Judgment pronounced on: 28.10.2025 + FAO(OS) 29/2025 & CM APPL. 12655/2025 SH INDERJEET SINGH BINDRA .....Appellant Through: Mr. Shyamal Kumar and Ms. Apoorva Pal, Advocates. versus SMT RAMESH KUMARI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rajesh Yadav, Senior Advocate with Mr. V.P. Rana, Mr. Rajat Agnihotri and Mr. Kunal Mittal, Advocates for Respondent No.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR JUDGMENT ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. 1. Through the present Appeal, the Appellant assails the correctness of the Judgment/Order dated 10.01.2025 [hereinafter referred to as ‘Impugned Order’] passed in Review Petition No. 10/2025, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the Review Petition filed by the Appellant seeking review of the Order dated 18.11.2024. In the aforesaid Order, the learned Single Judge dismissed the application seeking amendment of the plaint on the ground that the Signature Not Verified FAO(OS) 29/2025 Page 1 of 21 Signed By:SAVITA PASRICHA Signing Date:28.10.2025 14:32:49 application is barred by the period of limitation as the same has been sought after seven years of the institution of the suit and eight years on coming to know that the General Power of Attorney (‘GPA’) has been misused. 2. In the facts of the present case, the question which requires adjudication by this Court is whether an amendment application to insert a prayer for declaration/cancellation of GPA, which is barred by the limitation period, can be allowed or not? FACTUAL MATRIX: 3. In order to comprehend the issues involved in the present case, relevant facts in brief are required to be noticed. 4. The facts leading to the dispute are that one Mr. Jaswant Singh B