Revision petition concerning possession of tenanted premises was disposed of as infructuous, since respondents had already taken possession pursuant to orders of the Executing Court; reliance placed on N.C. Daga v. Inder Mohan Singh Rana and Vinod Kumar Verma v. Manmohan Verma.
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.
$~69
GURDEV SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sandeep Yadav, Advocate. versus
MOHD ALI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Advocate (presence not given)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
O R D E R
% 24.09.2025
SAURABH BANERJEE, J
SEPTEMBER 24, 2025/NA
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 26/09/2025 at 11:49:41
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the revision petition survives after the respondents took possession of the premises per the Executing Court's orders.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
N.C. Daga v. Inder Mohan Singh RanaRelied on¶2
[2003 (1) SCC 453] · Who else cites this
Vinod Kumar Verma v. Manmohan Verma & Anr.Relied on¶2
[Civil Appeal Nos.52205221 of 2008 order dated 19.08.2008]
Gurdev Singh
Mohd Ali
& Ors.
Saurabh Banerjee
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
