Respondent No.2 sought release of one-third of an amount deposited with the Registry as a condition for reagitating an Order IX Rule 13 application. The court declined, noting parties' rights were yet to be determined by the Trial Court, and dismissed the application.
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.
$~54
AJENDER SINGH .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sachin Kumar and Mr. Deepak Garg, Advocates.
versus
S. KULVINDER SINGH & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Himali, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA O R D E R % 13.02.2026
CM APPL. 10091/2026
This is a digitally signed order.
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 17/02/2026 at 12:43:11
are yet to be ascertained, no direction can be made for release of the amount to the Respondents, as has been sought by way of present Application.
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
FEBRUARY 13, 2026/ R
This is a digitally signed order. 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 17/02/2026 at 12:43:11
1 issue framed by the court
Whether Respondent No.2 could seek release of one-third of the amount deposited with the Registry pursuant to the order dated 05.09.2024.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
AJENDER SINGH
S. KULVINDER SINGH & ORS.
S. JAIJEET SINGH
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
