STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. vs DINESH KUMAR JAIN & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: 07.01.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 13.01.2026 + REVIEW PET. 1/2026 in FAO 53/2023, CM APPL 570/2026 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Appellants Through: Mr. Tushar Sannu and Ms. Ishika Jain, Advocates for GNCTD. Mr. Chetan Sharma, Sr. Advocate, ASG with Mr. Sameer Vashist, Standing Counsel, Mr. Anshuman, Mr. Naman, Mr. Amit Gupta, Mr. Yashwardhan Sharma, Advocates. IPS Prashant Gautam, DCP-Shahdara Inspector Dharmendra SHO Raj Kumar, P.S. Gandhi Nagar ACP Mahender Singh versus DINESH KUMAR JAIN & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ashwani Kr. Sharma and Mr. P.K. Dixit, Advocates for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA JUDGMENT CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA, J. 1. This petition under Section 114 and Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the Signature Not Verified REVIEW PET. 1/2026 in FAO 53/2023 Page 1 of 24 Signed By:KOMAL DHAWAN Signing Date:13.01.2026 14:39:03 CPC), has been filed by the appellants in FAO 53/2023 for reviewing the judgement dated 28.11.2025 dismissing the appeal. In the appeal, the review petitioners had challenged the order dated 30.01.2023of the learned District Judge, East District, Karkardooma Courts, in Misc. DJ No. 21/2022 in O.S. 2738/2016, whereby their application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 11.02.2020 was dismissed on the dual grounds of limitation and absence of sufficient cause. 2. According to the review petitioners, the impugned judgment suffers from errors apparent on the face of the record, warranting exercise of review jurisdiction. It is urged that the finding in the impugned judgment treating the application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC as barred by limitation is