M3M INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs BHAVYA DOSHI & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~80 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 24th March, 2026 + CM(M) 618/2026 M3M INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Manish K. Jha, Senior Advocate with Mr. Raymon Singh, Mr. Himanshu Mishra, Ms. Mahima Rai, Ms. Astha Sarin and Mr. Rajat Juneja, Advs. versus BHAVYA DOSHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Ishita Singh and Ms. Pranjal Mishra, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA ORDER (Oral) Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J. 1. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode. CAV 133/2026 2. Learned Counsel for the respondents has entered appearance, therefore, the caveat stands discharged. CM APPL. 18646/2026 (for Exemption) 3. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. CM(M) 618/2026, & CM APPL. 18645/2026 (for Stay) 4. The present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, assailing the order dated 16th March, 2026 passed by the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (“State Commission”) in Execution Application No. Signature Not Verified Signed By:NAMITA CM(M) 618/2026 Page 1 of 2 DHYANI Signing Date:25.03.2026 11:25:46 SC/7/EA/19/2026. 5. Learned Counsel for the respondents appeared on advance notice and accepts notice. 6. Heard. Record perused. 7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is liable to be set aside as warrants of attachment have been ordered against the properties of the third parties. 8. A perusal of the record shows that the said third parties have not challenged that impugned order. On this aspect, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in case the warrants of attachment have been stayed, the petitioner, i.e., M3M India Private Limited, is ready to pay 50% of