Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Rakesh Kumar Vs Ravi Kumar & Ors. — Partition | Delhi HC (2016)

Home
Delhi HC
2016
Rakesh Kumar Vs Ravi Kumar & Ors.Rakesh Kumar v. Ravi Kumar & Ors.

Dismissed

Rakesh Kumar v. Ravi Kumar & Ors.

Delhi HC1 Sept 2016RSA/120/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses an appeal without adjudication on merits because the appellant chose to withdraw it after arguments against delay were heard.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as withdrawn.

What the court decided

AI extract

A

$~5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- RSA 120/2016

RAKESH KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. J.P. Mishra and Mr. Krishna Dev Pandey, Advocates.

versus

RAVI KUMAR & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Gaurav Kumar Singh, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Arjun Singh Bawa, Advocate for R-2. Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, CGSC with Mr. T.P. Singh, Advocate for D-3.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA

O R D E R % 01.09.2016

C.M. Appl. Nos. 16389/2016 (for condonation of delay of 450 days in filing the appeal, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act), 16890/2016 (for condonation of delay of 215 days in re-filing the appeal, under Section 151 CPC) and RSA 120/2016

Independent of the aspect of delay in filing and re-filing of this

appeal of 450 days and 215 days, respectively, counsel for the appellant has been heard on merits.

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
Rakesh Kumar
respondent
Ravi Kumar

Coram

AI extract

Valmik J. Mehta

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Delhi HC
Decided on: 1 Sept 2016 · September
Registered: 3 May 2016
Case no.: RSA/120/2016

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Valmiki J. Mehta

State Bank of India Vs Malini Management & Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
31 Aug 2016
Smt Vijay Sharma Thr Attorney Sh Rajbir Sharma (Husband) Vs Sh Gopal Dass Thr Its Lr Sh Raj Kumar Ahuja & Ors.
31 Aug 2016
Hukam Singh & Ors. Vs Joginder Singh (Deceased) & Ors.
31 Aug 2016
Smt Paramjit Kaur & Ors. Vs Sh Teja Singh & Ors.
1 Sept 2016

Cite this judgement

Rakesh Kumar v. Ravi Kumar & Ors., RSA/120/2016 (DEL), decided on 1 September 2016.

The High Court of Delhi publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Bench / Coram

Valmik J. Mehta

Parties & counsel

Outcome

Appeal dismissed as withdrawn.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn following abandonment by the appellant after the court heard arguments regarding the condonation of delay in filing the appeal. No substantive decision on the merits of the underlying civil suit regarding res judicata was rendered in this order.

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

RSA 120/2016

page 1 of 3

It is found that the judgments of the courts below dismissed the suit of the appellant/plaintiff No. 1 as being barred by limitation and doctrine of res judicata . The judgments of the courts below note that the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiff, i.e., his father Attar Chand had executed a relinquishment deed in favour of his mother Smt. Ram Lubhai on 22.10.1965 and who had further sold the property to the mother of defendant No. 2/respondent No. 2-Sh. P.L. Anand vide an agreement to sell dated 16.11.1965. Also, a suit was filed by Smt.Ram Lubhai against Smt. Krishna Wanti, mother of defendant No. 2, questioning the sale transaction, which suit was dismissed and appeal against the same was also dismissed. Father of the appellant/plaintiff Sh. Attar Chand was a party to these earlier legal proceedings which culminated way back in the year 1975 when Civil Appeal No. 9/1975 was dismissed on 10.10.1975 against the judgment of the trial court dated 31.1.1975.

The courts below, therefore, have rightly dismissed the suit as being barred by res judicata because appellant claims through his predecessor-in-interest Attar Chand, and who was party to the earlier

page 2 of 3

RSA 120/2016

proceedings whereby the claim of the predecessor-in-interest of the appellant with the other legal heirs of Attar Chand including his widow Smt. Ram Lubhai was dismissed. A repeat Power of Attorney executed in 2006 would not therefore create a cause of action or extinguish the rights created in terms of the judgments of the courts dated 31.1.1975 and 10.10.1975 dismissing the earlier suit filed by Smt. Ram Lubhai against Smt. Krishna Wanti, mother of defendant No. 2.

At this stage, counsel for the appellant, and who is one of the plaintiffs being plaintiff No. 1, other plaintiffs having not challenged the dismissal of the suit with costs, states that the appeal is not pressed on merits and the same be allowed to be withdrawn.

In view of the above the present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J

SEPTEMBER 01, 2016 AK

page 3 of 3

RSA 120/2016

CNR

DLHC011173942016

Topic

Bench

Valmiki J. Mehta

Ram Lal Chawla Vs Assistant Engineer (Div - 10) & Ors.

1 Sept 2016

Ex Constable Krishan Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.

1 Sept 2016