Anil Bedi & ANR v. Anupma Ralhan & ORS

$~3 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ FAO 410/2014 & CM APPL. 21230/2014 ANIL BEDI & ANR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate.

versus ANUPMA RALHAN & ORS ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Durgesh Kumar Pandey and Mr.

Randeep Pundit, Advocate for respondents 1 and 2.

Mr. N.L. Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI

O R D E R

% 11.03.2016 1.

After brief submissions, learned counsel for the appellant has very fairly conceded that since the interim order passed on the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 is a consent order, the same should not be taken as a ground for adjudicating the rights of the parties in the main suit. Learned counsel for the respondent does not have any objection to the same.

2.

In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the parties, the present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn, with the observation that the expression of any opinion in the impugned order may not be taken as an expression on the merits of the case and the learned trial court shall decide the rights of the parties on the basis of

documents during the course of trial.

3.

Copy of the order be sent to the trial court. Copy of the order be also given dasti to counsel for the parties. V.K. SHALI, J MARCH 11, 2016 / n