MS SONIA RANDEV vs MS PRAGYA MADAN & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 04.02.2026 + FAO(OS) 13/2026, CM APPL. 6908/2026, CM APPL. 6909/2026 & CM APPL. 7557/2026 MS SONIA RANDEV .....Appellant Through: Mr. Rajiv Khosla with Ms. Apoorva Khosla, Ms. Shreya Kumari Sharma & Mr. Vikram Kumar, Advs. versus MS PRAGYA MADAN & ORS ......Respondents Through: Mr. Gaurav Mitra, Adv.(through VC). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK CHAUDHARY HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal has been preferred by the Appellant under Section 104 read with Order XLIII Rule 1(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (hereinafter referred to as “CPC”) read with Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Rules, 2018, assailing the Order dated 20.11.2025, passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the application of the Appellant under Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC was dismissed. 2. Briefly stated facts are that the Appellant instituted Civil Suit bearing CS (OS) No. 1025 of 2024 seeking, inter alia, cancellation of the Sale Deed dated 29.12.2023 executed by the Appellant in favour of respondent No.1 in respect of the Appellant’s residential property situated at Janakpuri, Delhi, on the ground that the said sale deed was a sham transaction executed without payment of any consideration. Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRATIBHA KUMARI FAO(OS) 13/2026 Page 1 of 6 Signing Date:09.02.2026 05:37:39 3. The genesis of the transaction is traced to the lifetime of Late Shri J.P. Randev, father of the appellant, who, acting on representations and inducement made by respondent No.2 regarding safety concerns in handling substantial cash transactions, agreed to a mechanism whereby the sale deed would initially be executed in favour of the wife of respondent No.2, who would thereafter sell the property a