GOVINDER SINGH vs TEJINDER SINGH & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order reserved on: 15.05.2026 Order pronounced on: 22.05.2026 Order uploaded on: 22.05.2026 + RFA(OS) 11/2018, CM APPL. 15548/2026, CM APPL. 15549/2026 & CM APPL. 15550/2026 GOVINDER SINGH .....Appellant Through: Mr. Rajeeve Bhalla, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Mr. Thakur Ankit Singh, Mr. Rupal Gupta and Mr. Yash, Advs. versus TEJINDER SINGH & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Giriraj Subramanium, Mr. Jagdeep Singh Lamba, Mr. Simarpal Singh Sawhney and Mr. Prayuj Sharma, Advs. for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR ORDER ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.: REV.PET. 106/2026 and CM APPL. 15548/2026[For stay] 1. The present Review Petition has been filed by the Review Applicant/Appellant, namely, Mr. Govinder Singh, seeking review of the judgment dated 19.12.2025 passed by this Court in RFA(OS) 11/2018 [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Impugned Judgment’], Signature Not Verified Signed By:JAI NARAYAN Signing Date:22.05.2026REV.PET.106/2026 in RFA(OS) 11/2018 Page 1 of 10 15:47:19 whereby the appeal preferred by the Appellant came to be dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 11.01.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in CS(OS) 973/1994 was affirmed. 2. At the very outset, it may be noted that there is an inadvertent typographical omission in the first sentence of paragraph No.21 of the Impugned Judgment. Consequently, in exercise of powers of correction, the said sentence shall stand corrected and shall be read as under: “It is well settled that the prohibition under Order XXIII Rule 3A of the CPC is applicable only between the parties to the original suit (parties to the compromise) and no suit shall lie on the ground that the compromise/agreement on which the decree is