Pawan v. Ravinder

$~57 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 834/2024 & I.A. 13269/2025, REVIEW PET. 330/2025 PAWAN .....Plaintiff Through:

None Mr. Puneet Singh Bindra, Mr. Vivek Kadyan, Ms. Charu Modi, Ms. Kriti Dang, Mr. Rishabh Gupta and Ms.

Shaanya Shukla, Advocates for Review Petitioner Ms. Manju along with Review Petitioner Ms. Manju in person versus RAVINDER .....Defendant Through:

None

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

O R D E R

% 26.05.2025 I.A. 13270/2025 (for exemption from filing certified copy of order dated 25.04.2025) 1.

This is an application seeking exemption from filing certified copies of the order dated 25.04.2025.

2.

In view of the averment made in the application, the application stands allowed, subject to just exceptions.

REVIEW PET. 330/2025 & I.A. 13269/2025 3.

This review petition has been filed by one Smt. Manju wife of late Sh. Ram Gopal under Section 114 read with XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Procedure, 1908 ('CPC') seeking recall of the order dated 25.04.2025. 3.1.

Vide order dated 25.04.2025 the suit had been disposed of on the basis of the submissions of the parties and their pleadings stating that there is no inter-se disputes and the Defendant admits the claims of the Plaintiff. 3.2.

The suit was disposed of on the plea of the Plaintiff and Defendant to the effect that they are the only legal heirs of late Sh. Ram Gopal and entitled to succeed to the suit land.

4.

The present review petition has been filed on behalf of Ms. Manju Rani on the plea that she was the legally wedded wife of late Sh. Ram Gopal (deceased).

4.1.

The Review Petitioner has placed on record several official identification documents, recording the status of the Review Petitioner as the wife of late Sh. Ram Gopal. More specifically, the documents include a P.P.O. book issued by Delhi Development Authority ('DDA') recording the name of the Review Petitioner as the wife of late Sh. Ram Gopal. It is stated that late Sh. Ram Gopal worked as a security guard in DDA and hence, the P.P.O. book was issued in favour of late Sh. Ram Gopal. 4.2.

The Review Petitioner has also placed on record a ration card issued on 03.06.2005, which records the name of Review Petitioner as the wife of the deceased.

5.

Mr. Bindra, learned counsel for the Review Petitioner states that the Plaintiff and Defendant have suppressed this material facts from this Court and mislead the Court in passing the decree for partition qua the estate of late Sh. Ram Gopal in two equal shares, whereas the Review Petitioner is entitled to 1/3rd Share in the estate of late Sh. Ram Gopal. 5.1.

He refers to contents of order dated 25.04.2025. He states that as is The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

evident from paragraph '1.6' of the said order, this Court was misled to believe that the Plaintiff and Defendant are the sole surviving legal heirs of late Sh. Ram Gopal.

5.2.

He states that copy of the present review petition has been served on the Plaintiff and Defendant through postal receipt dated 22.05.2025. 6.

None appears on behalf of Plaintiff and/or Defendant. 7.

On the prima facie review of the documents issued by statutory authorities, which have been placed on record along with the present petition, it is apparent that the Review Petitioner's name is recorded as the legally wedded wife of late Sh. Ram Gopal.

8.

This Court is also aware of the fact that there was no contest between Plaintiff and Defendant and, therefore, the order was passed on the uncontested pleas of the parties, without inviting any adjudication. The parties in the pleadings fail to disclose the existence of the review petition. 9.

This Court finds merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the Review Petitioner that the suit proceedings appear to be collusive to deny the rights of the Review Petitioner herein.

10.

Accordingly, until the next date of hearing, the order dated 25.04.2025 is hereby stayed. The direction to the mutation authorities to hear and dispose of the Plaintiff and Defendant's application for mutation is also hereby stayed.

11.

Upon steps being taken by the Review Petitioner, issue notice to Plaintiff and Defendant through all modes. In addition, through the counsel for the Plaintiff and Defendant to appear in this matter. 12.

Provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the CPC be complied with within one (1) week from today.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

13.

List on 13.10.2025.

14.

website of the Delhi High Court, www.delhihighcourt.nic.in, shall be treated as a certified copy of the order for the purpose of ensuring compliance. No physical copy of order shall be insisted by any authority/entity or litigant. MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J MAY 26, 2025/rhc/sk Click here to check corrigendum, if any The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.