RAM UGRAH SHARMA vs KANCHAN MALA

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on: 21st January, 2026 Pronounced on: 12th March, 2026 + RFA 68/2026 & CM APPL. NOS. 4172/2026, 4173/2026, 4174/2026 RAM UGRAH SHARMA .....Appellant Through: Mr. Bhardwaj S. Iyengar, Advocate. versus KANCHAN MALA .....Respondent Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA J U D G M E N T NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J. CM APPL. 4174/2026 (delay of 36 days in refiling) 1. An Application has been filed by the Appellant seeking condonation of delay of 36 days in re-filing the Appeal. 2. For the reasons stated in the Application, the delay of 36 days in re-filing the Appeal, is condoned. 3. The Application is disposed of, accordingly. CM APPL. 4173/2026 (for enlargement of time to deposit Court fees) 4. The present application has been filed by the Appellant seeking enlargement of time to deposit the court fee amounting to ₹1,00,084/-. At the outset, it is noticed that the requisite court fee on the present appeal has not been Signature Not Verified RFA 68/2026 Signed By:VIKAS Page 1 of 9 ARORA Signing Date:13.03.2026 13:07:31 fully paid. The Registry shall compute the deficit court fee, if any, and ensure that the same is recovered from the appellant. Application is disposed of accordingly with the above direction. RFA 68/2026 & CM NO.4172/2026 5. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 read withOrder XLI Rule 1of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “CPC”) has been preferred by the Appellant challenging the Judgment and decree dated 25.08.2025 of the learned District Judge-04, New Delhi, whereby the Suit filed by the Appellant seeking damages on account of malicious prosecution, was dismissed as being premature. 6. The genesis of the present Appeal lies in an Application filed by t