Appeal against a decree for possession of tenanted premises was dismissed in default as the appellant and counsel failed to appear on two hearing dates; the decree had already been executed.
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.
$~1
Through: None. Versus
SHOBHA SHARMA ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. K.S. Rekhi, Mr. Jai Vandhan & Mr. Ritesh Kumar Singh, Advs.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
O R D E R % 23.02.2024
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
TARA VITASTA GANJU, J
FEBRUARY 23, 2024 ‘gsr’
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 03/07/2025 at 06:26:26
1 issue framed by the court
Should the appeal against the decree of possession be entertained when neither the appellant nor counsel appears on repeated dates?
NITIN JAIN
SHOBHA SHARMA
VIBHU BAKHRU
TARA VITASTA GANJU
As recorded by the court registry
A first appeal against a decree of a Commercial Court under the Commercial Courts Act 2015.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
