PRITI SARAF vs AJAY SHARMA & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~62 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 15.09.2025 + RFA 868/2025 PRITI SARAF .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mudit Jain, Ms. Mahima Malhotra & Mr. Rudraksh Nakra, Advs. along with appellant in person & her son, Devesh Saraf, Director of R-2. versus AJAY SHARMA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Aman Panwar, Mr. Harsh Gattani & Ms. Ankita Singh, Advs. for R-1 along with R-1 in person. Mr. Attin Rastogi, Adv. for R1 Mr. Harish Malik, Adv. for R-2 Ms. Geeta Luthra, Sr. Adv., Ms. Kamakshi Agrawal & Mr. Rishabh Dahiya, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR RENU BHATNAGAR, J. (Oral) CM APPL. 58061/2025 (Exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. RFA 868/2025 & CM APPL. 58060/2025 (stay) 2. The present regular first appeal under Section 96 read with Order XLI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘CPC’) has been filed by the appellant against the Final Judgment and Decree dated 26.04.2025 (hereinafter referred to as, Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRIYADARSHANI JAIN RFA 868/2025 Page 1 of 13 Signing Date:16.09.2025 16:09:56 ‘Impugned Judgment’) and Order dated 29.03.2025 passed by the learned District Judge, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, in CS 4285/2024 titled Ajay Sharma v. M/s Asian Hotels (East) and Anr. 3. Vide Order dated 29.03.2025, the application preferred by the appellant under Order I Rule 10 CPC seeking her impleadment in the eviction suit filed by Respondent No. 1 against Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 was dismissed. 4. Vide the impugned Final Judgment dated 26.04.2025, the above captioned civil suit, filed by Respondent No. 1 was decreed in his favour under Order XII Rule 6 CPC, without impleading the appellant herein as a necessary party. 5. After decreein