SUMESH MADAN vs BHAVESH MADAN & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on: 15th January, 2026 Pronounced on: 07th April, 2026 + CM(M) 3154/2024, CM APPL. 46062/2024 & 46064/2024 SUMESH MADAN S/O Late Sh. R. C. Madan, R/O 136, Mandakini Enclave, Alaknanda, New Delhi. through Attorney, Sh. Virender Chadha. .....Petitioner Through: Appearance not given. Versus 1. BHAVESH MADAN S/O Late Sh. R.C. Madan 2. SMT. REETU MADAN W/O Sh. Bhavesh Madan, both R/O 137, Mandakini Enclave, Alaknanda, New Delhi. 3. ANJU CHADHA W/O Sh. Virender Chadha 4. VIRENDER CHADHA S/O Late Sh. K.C. Chadha both R/O 136, Mandakini Enclave Alaknanda, New Delhi. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rajesh Mahindru & Mr. Birender Chaudhary, Advs. for R-1. Mr. Rishi Bharadwaj, Advocate for R-3 and R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA J U D G M E N T CM(M) 3154/2024 Page 1 of 9 Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:RITA SHARMA Signing Date:08.04.2026 16:47:32 NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J. 1. Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed on behalf of the Applicant, Sumesh Madan against Order dated 18.12.2023 passed by learned ADJ-01, New Delhi, whereby his Application for impleadment as party under Order I Rule 10 of CPC, in the Suit filed by the Respondents Nos. 1 & 2, for Possession, had been dismissed. 2. A Civil suit bearing CS DJ 619/2020 was filed by Respondent Nos.1 & 2 Bhavesh Madan and Reetu Madan, for Mandatory Injunction, Permanent Injunction and Damages against Anju Chadha, Respondent No.3 and her husband Virender Chadha, Respondent No.4. 3. The facts as narrated in the Plaint, were that Plaintiffs Bhavesh Madan and Reetu Madan were registered owners and in legal possession of the Suit Property bearing No.136, Mandakini Enclave, Alaknanda, New Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as sui