Disposed¶26

Shobha Sachdeva & Anr. v. Narender Kumar Sachdeva

Delhi HC11 Jul 2025CM(M)/1200/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: expeditious disposal of appeal; requisite priority to First Appellate Court; injunction under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC; suit for mandatory and permanent injunction; appeal pending before District Judge; judicial transfers; hearing afresh; fresh hearing on 28th instant; CM(M) 1827/2023 order dated 16.11.2023; 8-week timeline; CM(M) 1200/2025; CM APPL. 40466/2025; Shobha Sachdeva v. Narender Kumar Sachdeva; High Court of Delhi; Justice Manoj Jain; decided 11.07.2025.

What did the court decide?

Petition (along with pending application CM APPL. 40466/2025) disposed of, with the expectation that the learned First Appellate Court give requisite priority to the appeal and dispose of it as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 8 weeks. ¶26

Shobha Sachdeva & Anr. Vs Narender Kumar Sachdeva — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned First Appellate Court should be directed to decide the petitioners' (appellants') pending appeal against the injunction order expeditiously.

¶15

Court's answer

Since the appeal was filed in the year 2022 and in view of the order dated 16.11.2023 of this Court, the learned First Appellate Court is expected to give requisite priority to the appeal and make best endeavour to dispose of it as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 8 weeks.

¶25

Key takeaways

On account of transfers, with the matter having earlier been fixed for orders on at least two occasions, the appeal would be required to be heard afresh by the learned First Appellate Court.obiter¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Manoj Jain, J.), CM(M) 1200/2025, decided 11.07.2025: Defendants-appellants (Shobha Sachdeva & Anr.) sought expeditious disposal of their first appeal, pending before the learned District Judge, against an injunction order made absolute on 06.09.2023 (application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC allowed by the learned Civil Judge) in a suit for mandatory and permanent injunction filed by Narender Kumar Sachdeva. Although earlier fixed for orders on at least two occasions, the appeal remained undecided owing to transfers and would have to be heard afresh; an earlier order dated 16.11.2023 in CM(M) 1827/2023 had already directed pronouncement of the final order within four weeks. Since the appeal was filed in 2022, the Court expected the learned First Appellate Court to give requisite priority to it and make best endeavour to dispose of it as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 8 weeks. Petition and pending application stood disposed of accordingly.

¶1

$~55

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 11^th July, 2025

¶4

- CM(M) 1200/2025 & CM APPL. 40466/2025

¶5

SHOBHA SACHDEVA & ANR.

¶6

.....Petitioner

¶7

Through: Mr. Eklavya Bahl with Mr. Pawas Aggarwal and Mr. Apoorva Bahl, Advocates

¶8

versus

¶9

NARENDER KUMAR SACHDEVA

¶10

.....Respondent

¶11

Through: None. CORAM:

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶13

Respondent herein has filed a suit for mandatory and permanent injunction. Such suit is directed against his brother Dr. Satish Chander Sachdeva and his wife Dr. Shobha Sachdeva.

¶14

When the abovesaid suit was taken up by the learned Civil Judge on 29.11.2022, defendants were restrained from dispossessing the suit property. 3. Such injunction order was made absolute as the application moved under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC was also allowed on 06.09.2023.

¶15

The abovesaid order has already been challenged by the defendants by filing an appeal which is pending adjudication before learned District Judge. 5. The petitioners herein are such appellants and their grievance is, merely, to the effect that such appeal has yet not been decided. They, therefore, seek expeditious disposal of their such appeal.

¶16

During course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the appeal was filed immediately and it was heard by the

¶17

Signature Not Verified

¶18

CM(M) 1200/2025

¶19

¶20

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 4.07.2025 12:17:20

¶21

learned First Appellate Court from time to time and was even fixed for orders but in the interregnum, on account of there being transfers, the appeal has yet not been decided. It is informed that the said appeal is coming up for fresh hearing on 28^th instant.

¶22

Undoubtedly, in view of the abovesaid, the appeal would required to be heard afresh by the learned First Appellate Court.

¶23

Learned counsel for petitioners also draws attention of this Court to one earlier order passed by this Court on 16.11.2023. Earlier also the petitioner had come up with a similar request and while disposing of CM(M) 1827/2023, this Court had directed the learned First Appellate Court to pronounce the final order, with respect to the appeal and pending applications, preferably, within four weeks.

¶24

This Court can understand the grievance raised by the appellants as on previous, at least, two occasions, the matter had been fixed for orders by the then learned Presiding Officer.

¶25

Since the appeal was filed in the year 2022, and also in view of above order dated 16.11.2023 of this Court, this Court expects that the learned First Appellate Court would give requisite priority to the abovesaid appeal and would make best endeavor to dispose that of, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 8 weeks.

¶26

Petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶27

Pending application also stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶28

MANOJ JAIN, J

¶29

JULY 11, 2025/ sw/JS

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Digitally Signed CM(M) 1200/2025 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 4.07.2025 12:17:20

¶32

Shobha Sachdeva & Anr. v. Narender Kumar Sachdeva

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shobha Sachdeva & Anr. v. Narender Kumar Sachdeva

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijayant Kumar Singh Vs Smt Sneh Gakhar

Gita Khorana and Ors. Vs Punit Beriwala and Ors.

Priyanka Ailawadi Vs Saurabh Goel

Anil Singh Vs Pawan Gulati

Ankur Jain Vs Shakuntala Devi

Sonia Marwah Vs Rohit Marwah & Anr.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. Vs Narinder Garg

Anu Manglani Vs Suresh Arora & Anr.

Vijayant Kumar Singh Vs Smt Sneh Gakhar

Gita Khorana and Ors. Vs Punit Beriwala and Ors.

Priyanka Ailawadi Vs Saurabh Goel

Ghanshyam Bhagchandani Vs Sangeeta

Mr. Abdul Mojeeb Vs Mr. Rahul Singhal

Masjidnoor Ahmed Waqf through Mohd Azam Vs Mohd Mubarak & Anr.