Ruchi Gupta v. Amit Sharma

$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA 108/2025 RUCHI GUPTA .....Appellant Through:

Mr.

Abdul Karim Ansari, Mr.

Bhuwan Raj Seth & Ms. Pooja Chauhan, Advocates.

versus AMIT SHARMA .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Gautam Kumar Laha, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

O R D E R

% 20.01.2026 1.

Regular First Appeal under Section 96 read with Order 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has been filed on behalf of the Appellant for setting aside the Impugned Order/Judgment/Decree dated 27.07.2024 whereby the Plaint has been rejected on account of non-filing of the requsite court fees.

2.

Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that he had purchased the court fees a day prior to the Impugned Order and had sought to place it on record along with the Application under 169 but on the date of Order i.e. 27.07.2024, his presence was not recorded. The submissions of the Appellant, were not considered and the Suit has been rejected. He undertakes to file the court fees within seven days, before the learned Trial Court.

3.

In view of the submissions made, the Impugned Order dated 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 23/01/2026 at 12:22:16

27.07.2024 is hereby set-aside with the directions to deposit the deficit court fees before the learned Trial Court, within seven days failing which, the learned Trial Court is at liberty to proceed, in accordance with law. 4.

The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J JANUARY 20, 2026/RS 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 23/01/2026 at 12:22:16