RITIK KUMAR vs R.H. AGRO OVERSEAS

Judgment text excerpt

$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 08.05.2026 + FAO (COMM) 79/2026 RITIK KUMAR .....Appellant Through: Mr. Vinay P. Tripathi, Mr. Abhinav Jaganathan and Ms. Preeti Shukla, Advs. versus R.H. AGRO OVERSEAS .....Respondent Through: Ms. Rima Majumdar, Ms. Deboleena Dutta, Ms. Prashni Kathuria and Mrs. Bindra Rana, 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. 31082/2026 (for clarification of order dated 07.04.2016) 1. The present appeal stands disposed of vide judgment dated 07.04.2026. In the said judgment, this Court had passed the following relevant directions: “26. Accordingly, while sustaining the grant of ad-interim ex- parte injunction, the impugned order is modified to the extent that the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC shall be treated as pending and shall be decided afresh by the Trial Court after granting an opportunity to the Appellant to file its reply and advance submissions, in accordance with law. The application will be decided by the Trial Court without being influenced by the findings returned by it in the impugned order and any observation made in this appeal. All rights and Signature Not Verified FAO (COMM) 79/2026 Page 1 of 4 Signed By:MOHIT Signing Date:14.05.2026 18:26 contentions of the parties are left open. 27. The Appellant is directed to file its reply to the injunction application and its written statement within one (1) week, along with affidavit of admission/denial of documents. The Respondent is directed to file its rejoinder and replication within one (1) week thereafter, along with affidavit of admission/denial of documents. The Trial Court is requested to hear and adjudicate the injunction applic