RAVINDER DUTTA vs PARVINDER DUTTA

Judgment text excerpt

$~59 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 20th January 2026 + CM(M) 149/2026 & CM APPL. 3794/2026 RAVINDER DUTTA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Chiraayu Trehan, Mr. Ritu Raj and Mr. Dilip Shukla, Advocates. versus PARVINDER DUTTA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Counsel (Appearance not given). CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA ORDER Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J. (Oral) 1. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 3795/2026 (for exemption) 2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of. CM(M) 149/2026 & CM APPL. 3794/2026 (for stay) 3. The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the order dated 04th December, 2025 passed by the learned Trial Court in Civil DJ No. 132/2016, whereby the application filed by the petitioner/defendant Nos. 1, 4 and 5 under Order XIV Rule 5 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has been dismissed. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has appeared on advance notice and accepts notice. 5. Heard. Record perused. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Trial Court Signature Not Verified CM(M) 149/2026 Page 1 of 3 Signed By:VAISHALI CHAUHAN Signing Date:21.01.2026 11:29:26 has passed the impugned order without duly appreciating the facts on record and that the additional issues sought to be framed by the petitioner are essential for the proper adjudication of the case. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the present petition has been filed only with a view to delay the proceedings and that there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. 8. The operative portion of the impugned order reads as under : “…Perusal of the record shows that issues wer