JAI NATH YADAV & ANR. vs SOMNATH YADAV @ SHOBH NATH YADAV & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 08.05.2026 + RFA(COMM) 678/2025 JAI NATH YADAV & ANR. .....APPELLANTS Through: Mr. D.B. Yadav, Mr. Sauraj Yadav and Mr. Satyavijay Yadav, Advs. versus SOMNATH YADAV @ SHOBH NATH YADAV & ANR. .....RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. R.N. Dubey and Mr. Himanshu, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J. (ORAL) CM APPL. 31071/2026 (for exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. 2. The application is disposed of. RFA(COMM) 678/2025, REVIEW PET. 211/2026 and CM APPL. 31070/2026 3. This petition has been filed by the appellant under Section 114, read with order XLVII Rule 1 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking review of the judgment dated 24.03.2026 [the ‘impugned judgment’]. 4. This Court vide the impugned judgment had upheld the Trial Court’s findings in its judgment dated 13.10.2025, that the Petitioner (i.e., Signature Not Verified RFA(COMM) 678/2025 Page 1 of 2 Signed By:MOHIT Signing Date:14.05.2026 18:29 Appellant) was only able to prove the payment of Rs. 8,00,000/- [Rupees Eight Lakhs only] to the Respondent through bank transfer and was unable to substantiate its claim for payment of Rs. 24,00,000/- [Rupees Twenty- Four Lakhs only] in cash to the Respondent, out of the alleged payment of Rs. 32,00,000/- [Rupees Thirty-Two Lakhs only] said to have been made by the Appellant, and accordingly dismissed the appeal. 5. Having perused the grounds raised in the review petition, it is evident that the Appellant seeks a re-hearing of the matter on the merits under the guise of review. The grounds raised essentially seek a re-appreciation of the findings already rendered. 6. No ground raised therein show