NIRMAL LUGANI & ORS. vs LATE SH RAM SARUP LUGANI & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 17.09.2025 Judgment pronounced on: 25.09.2025 + FAO(OS) 21/2023 & CM APPL. 7606/2023 NIRMAL LUGANI & ORS. .... Appellants Through: Mr. Faisal Sherwani, Mr. Aditya Vikram, Mr. Shikher Deep Aggarwal and Ms. Priyal Bapna, Advocates versus LATE SH RAM SARUP LUGANI & ORS. ....Respondents Through: Ms. Ruchira Gupta, Mr. Abhishek Verma and Mr. Ramey Krishan Rana, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR JUDGMENT HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. 1. The present Appeal, filed under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 19661, read with Section 104 along with Order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 19082, assails the Order dated 04.01.20233 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in I.A. No. 8273/2021 in CS (OS) 182/2019, titled ‘Sh. Ram Sarup Lugani & Anr. v. Nirmal Lugani & Ors.’. 1 Delhi High Court Act 2 CPC 3 Impugned Order Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARVINDER KAUR BHATIA FAO(OS) 21/2023 Page 1 of 19 Signing Date:26.09.2025 12:48:01 2. The said application was filed by Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 herein under Order I Rule 10 read with Order XXII Rule 10, Order XXII Rule 3 and Section 151 of the CPC seeking substitution of Respondent No. 1 with Respondent Nos. 3 and 4, or in the alternative, impleadment of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 as necessary and proper parties, along with leave to them to institute the accompanying suit under Section 92 of the CPC against the Appellants. 3. The dispute involved herein is singular insofar as the Appellants contend that the learned Single Judge erred in granting the reliefs sought by the Respondents. For clarity, the reliefs claimed in I.A. No. 8273/2021 are set out below:- “…….. (i) To