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

Court: Delhi High Court
Date: 2026-01-13
Citation: REVIEW PET.-1/2026 2026:DHC:235
Petitioner: STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
Respondent: DINESH KUMAR JAIN & ANR.

[Official PDF on Delhi High Court website](https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/76013012026REVIEWPET12026_144127.pdf)

## 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 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 contrary to the binding directions is

https://niyam.ai/judgements/high-court/2026/january/state-of-nct-of-delhi-anr-vs-dinesh-kumar-jain-anr