Nathu Ram & ANR. v. Vinod Kumar & ANR.

$~74 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO 311/2023 & CM APPL. 62274/2023 NATHU RAM & ANR.

.....Appellants Through:

Mr. V.P. Singh with Ms. Yashasvi Singh, Mr. Mohit Behagal and Ms.

Sangeeta G., Advocates.

versus VINOD KUMAR & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

O R D E R

% 23.10.2024 1.

The present appeal has been filed by the tenant who is aggrieved by order passed in an application moved under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC read with Section 151 CPC.

2.

However, at the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant states that during pendency of the matter, he had moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and such application has been allowed and, resultantly, the suit has been rejected vide order dated 09.08.2024. 3.

In view of the above said subsequent development, the present appeal has become infructuous.

4.

The appeal stands disposed of as having become infructuous. MANOJ JAIN, J OCTOBER 23, 2024/st The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/10/2024 at 11:58:47