ALBERT GOMES & ANR. vs HELEN GOMES & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~56 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 20th February, 2026 + CM(M) 406/2026 ALBERT GOMES & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Bishnu Kumar, Advocate (through VC). versus HELEN GOMES & ORS. .....Respondents Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA ORDER (Oral) Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J. 1. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 11756/2026 (for exemption) 2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of. CM(M) 406/2026 & CM APPL. 11755/2026 3. The present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, assailing the order dated 28th November, 2025, passed by the trial court in Execution Petition No. 232/2022. 4. Heard. Record Perused. 5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that petitioners have nothing to do with multiple litigations, including the civil suit in which the decree in question has been passed. It is submitted that the petitioners were Signature Not Verified CM(M) 406/2026 Page 1 of 3 Signed By:MANISHA RAJPUT Signing Date:23.02.2026 16:30:04 never impleaded as party in the suit and therefore, the decree could not have been executed against them. It is further argued that the respondents have suppressed the status of the petitioners as tenants in the suit premises. On these grounds, it is prayed that the impugned order be set aside and that the petitioners be put into possession of the suit premises. 6. The relevant portion of the impugned order reads as under: “Memo of parties along-with an application u/s 379, BNSS filed on behalf of the DH. The same are taken on record. Another application filed on behalf of the DH seeking possession of immovable property i.e. 6/297, Lalita Park, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-1