Kulbir Singh Chandhok Vs Vipula Chandhok — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Kulbir Singh Chandhok Vs Vipula Chandhok — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed of as not pressed with liberty to the appellant to approach the learned Single Judge by way of an application seeking appropriate clarification/correction of the factual error; entitlement to take all pleas and grievances raised in this appeal in that fresh application; and openness to challenge the outcome of the clarification application by way of a fresh appeal.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant's plea that the impugned order incorrectly records a 2008 joint mutation application required determination in this appeal, or whether the appropriate remedy lay in correction of the factual error by the learned Single Judge.

Court's answer

Even if the appellant's plea regarding the recorded 2008 joint mutation application were treated as correct, the appropriate remedy of the appellant would be to first approach the learned Single Judge for correction of this factual error in the impugned order.

Ratio / Principle

The appeal was disposed of as not pressed, with liberty to the appellant to approach the learned Single Judge seeking appropriate clarification by way of an application; the said application, as and when moved, will be considered as per law.

Key takeaways

If aggrieved by the disposal of the clarification application, it will be open for the appellant to challenge the outcome thereof by way of a fresh appeal.ratio¶23
The appellant will be entitled to take all the pleas and raise all the grievances, including those taken and/or raised before this Court in the present appeal, in the fresh application to be filed before the learned Single Judge.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Partition suit – Preliminary partition decree – Order dated 30.09.2024 of learned Single Judge in CS(OS) No.184/2018 decreed suit of respondent nos.1 to 6 and passed preliminary partition decree over property B-39, Greater Kailash Part-I, New Delhi – Appellant (under section 10, Delhi High Court Act, 1966) contended the impugned order incorrectly recorded a 2008 joint mutation application, asserting the application related to mutation of respective shares following an alleged 1998 partition – Division Bench held that even if the plea were correct, the appropriate remedy is correction of the factual error by the learned Single Judge, not adjudication in this appeal – Appeal disposed of as not pressed with liberty to seek clarification by application before the learned Single Judge; such application to be considered as per law – If aggrieved by its disposal, appellant may challenge the outcome by fresh appeal – All pleas raised herein may be reiterated in the fresh application (Rekha Palli and Saurabh Banerjee, JJ.).

$~87

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- RFA(OS) 6/2025

KULBIR SINGH CHANDHOK

.....Appellant Through: Mr.Bhagat Singh, Adv. versus

VIPULA CHANDHOK

.....Respondent

Through:

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

%

O R D E R 23.01.2025

CM APPL. 4406/2025 & CM APPL. 4408/2025

Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The applications stand disposed of.

RFA(OS) 6/2025, CM APPL.4409/2025 (delay of 25 days (RF)) & CM APPL.4407/2025 (stay)

The present appeal under section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966, seeks to assail the impugned order dated 30.09.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in CS(OS) No.184/2018. Vide the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has decreed the suit preferred by respondent nos.1 to 6 and has consequently, passed a decree of preliminary partition in respect of property bearing no. B-39, Greater

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 27/01/2025 at 12:05:15

Kailash Part–I, New Delhi.

The learned counsel for the appellant primarily submits that the impugned order incorrectly records that the parties had, in the year 2008, made an application for joint mutation of the property in their name collectively. As per learned counsel for the appellant, the said application was made for mutation of the respective partitioned share of the parties separately, only in furtherance of the partition of the property, which according to him, had already taken place in 1998.

In our view, even if this plea of the appellant were to be treated as correct, the appropriate remedy of the appellant would be to first approach the learned Single Judge for correction of this factual error in the impugned order.

When faced with this situation, learned counsel for the appellant seeks leave to withdraw the appeal with liberty to approach the learned Single Judge by way of an appropriate application seeking clarification.

In the light of the aforesaid, the appeal is, as prayed for, disposed of as not pressed with liberty to the appellant to approach the learned Single Judge, by allowing the appellant to seek appropriate clarification by way of an application in accordance with the law. Needless to say, the said application, as and when moved, will be considered as per law.

We further make it clear that the appellant is being permitted to approach the learned Single Judge by way of a clarification application, if aggrieved by the disposal thereof it will be open for the appellant to challenge the outcome thereof by way of a fresh appeal.

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 27/01/2025 at 12:05:15

We, accordingly, make it clear that the appellant will be entitled to take all the pleas and raise all the grievances including those taken and/ or raised before us in the present appeal in the fresh application to be filed before the learned Single Judge in terms of the above direction.

REKHA PALLI, J

SAURABH BANERJEE, J

JANUARY 23, 2025 kk

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 27/01/2025 at 12:05:15