Roopa Khanna v. Anil Varma & ORS.

$~12 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ EFA(OS) 15/2025 ROOPA KHANNA .....Appellant Through:

Mr. Varun Singh, Ms. Parijat, Mr. Shikher Upadhyay and Ms.

Alankriti, Advs.

versus ANIL VARMA & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Ateev Mathur, Mr. Amol Sharma and Mr. Sanjay Gupta, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

O R D E R

% 05.12.2025 CM APPL. 76950/2025 (delay of 41 days in filing review petition) 1.

By way of the present application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the Review Applicant seeks condonation of delay of 41 days in re-filing the Review Petition No. 604/2025. 2.

For the sufficient reasons as stated in the application, the delay is condoned.

3.

Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of. CM APPL. 76949/2025 (exemption) 4.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

5.

Application stands disposed of.

REVIEW PET. 604/2025 and CM APPL. 76948/2025 (stay) 6.

A Special Leave Petition (SLP) bearing No. 29253/2025 was filed before the Supreme Court by the Review Applicant against the judgment passed by this Court on 23.09.2025.

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 08/12/2025 at 11:43:51

7.

The aforesaid SLP has been dismissed and the following order was passed by the Supreme Court:- "1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2.

We do not find any case is made out for interference with the impugned order. The Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed.

3.

Pending application also stands disposed of." 8.

Now the Review Applicant seeks review of the judgment dated 23.09.2025, while projecting that the suit property was two separate units, which could be physically divided by metes and bounds. 9.

This aspect has already been considered by this Court while delivering the judgment. It is noticed that at one stage the Review Applicant was given the right of pre-emption to purchase the 4/9th share of the suit property, to which she agreed. However, she subsequently resiled.

10.

In these circumstances, the Review Applicant cannot be permitted now to re-argue the Appeal. Hence, this Court finds no merit in the Review Petition and the same is dismissed. The pending application is also closed.

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.

DECEMBER 05, 2025/sp/dev 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 08/12/2025 at 11:43:51