Dismissed

Vinod Kumar Arora v. Rajinder Kumar Jain

Delhi HC26 May 2025RC.REV./169/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court allowed an early hearing of a review petition. The court dismissed the revision petition as not maintainable since identical relief was sought in a Trial Court application, but granted liberty to mention that matter. The eviction order operation was stayed pending the review outcome.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition disposed of; liberty granted to activate Trial Court application; eviction order stayed pending review outcome.

Vinod Kumar Arora Vs Rajinder Kumar Jain — Property and Title | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~94

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- RC.REV. 169/2025

¶4

VINOD KUMAR ARORA .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Jai Sahai Endlaw, Ms. Shivalika Rudrabatla & Ms. Sagarika Kavl, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

RAJINDER KUMAR JAIN .....Respondent Through:

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

¶10

O R D E R % 26.05.2025

¶11

CM APPL. 32950/2025 (early hearing)

¶12

This is an application for early hearing of the present review petition prior to 30.05.2025.

¶13

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the review petition is taken up for hearing today.

¶14

The application stands disposed of.

¶15

RC.REV. 169/2025

¶16

The revision petition has been filed seeking revision of the order dated 18.12.2024 passed by the learned Additional Rent Controller, Delhi (Central), in the matter titled ‘ Rajinder Kumar Jain v. Vinod Kumar Arora’ in RC ARC No. 486 of 2019’ (‘ Eviction Petition ’). The said eviction petition was allowed and the Petitioner was directed to vacate the premises in question vide impugned order dated 18.12.2024. It is submitted by the

¶17

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 01/07/2025 at 16:36:27

¶18

learned counsel for the Petitioner that the impugned order was passed without hearing the arguments of the Petitioner seeking leave to defend the petition.

¶19

It is further submitted that the Petitioner has preferred a review application seeking review of the order dated 18.12.2024. The said review application was listed before the learned Trial Court on 11.02.2025, on which date, the learned Trial Court issued notice to the Respondent on filing of the PF and listed the review application on 17.04.2025. Despite the direction to file PF, the petitioner failed to comply with the order dated 11.02.2025. Accordingly, on 17.04.2025, the learned Trial Court issued a fresh notice on filing PF and adjourned the review application on 05.08.2025. Subsequent to the order dated 17.04.2025, the petitioner has filed an application seeking stay of the operation of the impugned order dated 18.12.2024 before the learned Trial Court.

¶20

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said application will also be listed before the learned Trial Court on 05.08.2025, which is the date already fixed. In the said application dated 06.05.2025 seeking stay of the operation of the impugned order dated 18.12.2024, the petitioner has stated that as per the provision of Section 14(7) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, the period of six months granted to the petitioner from the date of eviction dated 18.12.2024, would expire on 18.06.2025.

¶21

In view of the same, the petitioner has sought a stay of the operation of the eviction order dated 18.12.2024, during the pendency of the review application filed by the petitioner. In view of the application already filed before the learned Trial Court, the present revision petition seeking the identical relief is not maintainable. However, the petitioner is granted liberty

¶22

¶23

to mention before the learned Trial Court to take up the application dated 06.05.2025 filed by the petitioner before the learned Trial Court for hearing before 18.06.2025.

¶24

The present revision petition is disposed of with the above observation.

¶25

It is clarified that the present order is restricted to the grant of stay of the operation of the impugned eviction order dated 18.12.2024 and shall not come in the way of the Petitioner challenging the same before this Court, subject to the outcome of the review application.

¶26

The date already fixed, that is, on 30.05.2025 stands cancelled.

¶27

TEJAS KARIA, J

¶28

MAY 26, 2025 / ‘A’

¶29

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶30

Vinod Kumar Arora v. Rajinder Kumar Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar Arora v. Rajinder Kumar Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Ramesh Chandra Agarwal Vs Sh Rajeev Kumar

Geeta Chatterjee & Anr. Vs Mahabir Prasada (Deceased Thr His LRS0 & Ors.

Uma Aggarwal Vs Gurpreet Singh Bhattal

Dr. Rajneesh Narang Vs Supriya Anand & Anr.

Manmohan Singh (Since Deceased) Thr His Legal Heirs & Ors. Vs S Harbans Singh (Since Deceased) Thr His Legal Heris & Ors.

Sushil Kumar Vs University of Delhi and Anr.