Disposed¶20

Sh. Nitesh Bhardwaj v. the Tehsildar/Executive Magistrate

Delhi HC22 Jan 2026W.P.(C)/933/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.(C) 933/2026; Nitesh Bhardwaj v. The Tehsildar/Executive Magistrate; High Court of Delhi; order dated 22.01.2026; Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav; legal heir certificate dated 07.06.2022; cancellation of legal heir certificate; sale deeds by Alok Malhotra and Anjali Ratti/Rathi in the name of Jagdish Yadav; exclusion of heir Mrs. Anuradha; pending suit for declaration of ownership; no separate writ petition where similar cause of action pending; liberty to agitate issues before trial court; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to agitate all issues before the concerned trial court; no separate writ entertained to set aside the legal heir certificate dated 07.06.2022; the instant petition stands disposed of. ¶20

Sh. Nitesh Bhardwaj Vs the Tehsildar/Executive Magistrate — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether a separate writ petition can be entertained at the petitioner's instance to set aside the legal heir certificate dated 07.06.2022 when proceedings relating to a similar cause of action are already pending. +1 more

¶20

Court's answer

A separate writ petition cannot be entertained at the petitioner's instance to set aside the legal heir certificate dated 07.06.2022, because proceedings relating to a similar cause of action are already pending.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner will have full opportunity to agitate all the issues before the concerned trial court.

¶6

Key takeaways

If such issues are raised, the competent Court will have to consider them appropriately; there is no reason why the competent Court would not examine the legality, validity, and the legal implications thereof.ratio¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav), W.P.(C) 933/2026, order dated 22.01.2026: Petitioner Nitesh Bhardwaj sought directions to the Tehsildar to assign his complaint for cancellation of a legal heir certificate dated 07.06.2022, contending that sale deeds executed in the name of Jagdish Yadav by substituted heirs Mr. Alok Malhotra and Mrs. Anjali Ratti improperly proceeded on a certificate omitting co-heir Mrs. Anuradha. The Court held that, as proceedings relating to a similar cause of action were already pending (the petitioner's suit for declaration of ownership), no separate writ petition would be entertained to set aside the legal heir certificate; the petitioner retains full opportunity to agitate all such issues before the concerned trial court, which must examine their legality, validity and legal implications. The petition was disposed of with liberty so reserved.

¶1

$~108

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 933/2026

¶4

SH. NITESH BHARDWAJ .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. V P Rana and Mr. Kunal Mittal, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

THE TEHSILDAR/EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Raghvendra Upadhyay, Ms. Purnima Jain and Mr. Swaraj Maurya, Advocates.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

¶10

O R D E R % 22.01.2026

¶11

The petition is for directions to the Tehsildar to assign the complaint filed by the petitioner for cancelation of the legal heir certificate dated 07.06.2022.

¶12

It appears that the petitioner has instituted a suit for declaration of ownership in respect of certain immovable properties against one Jagdish Lal Malhotra (deceased). Upon the demise of said Jagdish Lal Malhotra, his purported legal heirs Mr. Alok Malhotra, Mrs. Anjali Ratti and Mrs. Anuradha, have been substituted in his place.

¶13

During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner became aware of a third party who is claiming ownership of the suit property, on the basis of sale deeds executed by Mr. Alok Malhotra and Mrs. Anjali Ratti.

¶14

The Sale deeds appear to have been executed in the name of Jagdish

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

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 27/01/2026 at 12:27:21

¶17

Yadav by Mr. Alok Malhotra and Mrs. Anjali Rathi. The same seems to have been done on the basis of the legal heir certificate which apparently does not include the name of Mrs. Anuradha.

¶18

The petitioner submits that the exclusion of the name of Mrs. Anuradha, who admittedly is the legal heir of deceased Jagdish Lal Malhotra, the sale deed ought not to have been executed.

¶19

Having considered the overall facts and circumstances, the Court finds that the petitioner will have full opportunity to agitate all the issues before the concerned trial court. If such issues are raised, the competent Court will have to consider them appropriately. There is no reason why the competent Court would not examine the legality, validity, and the legal implications thereof.

¶20

Thus, there cannot be a separate writ petition which should be entertained at the instance of the petitioner to set aside the legal heir certificate dated 07.06.2022, when proceedings relating to a similar cause of action is already pending. Reserving the aforesaid liberty, the instant petition stands disposed of.

¶21

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J

¶22

JANUARY 22, 2026 SH

¶23

This is a digitally signed order.

¶24

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 27/01/2026 at 12:27:21

Sh. Nitesh Bhardwaj v. the Tehsildar/Executive Magistrate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sh. Nitesh Bhardwaj v. the Tehsildar/Executive Magistrate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.D. Ramnath Company Family Trust Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate & Ors.

Mohammad Hamza Akhtar Vs Union of India & Anr.

Dalip Kumar Chahar Vs Union of India & Ors.

Thakur Caterers Vs Union of India & Ors.

Paul Nanda & Ors. Vs UOI & Anr.

Bank of Baroda & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Union of India through Secretary Ministry of Defence & Ors. Vs Ex Hfo Manoj Kumar Singh No. 656613-N

Rambabu Yadav Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

R.D. Ramnath Company Family Trust Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate & Ors.

Mohammad Hamza Akhtar Vs Union of India & Anr.

Shankar Shyamnaval Mishra Vs Air India

Dr. Khursheed Mallick Vs Union of India & Anr.

Chanchal Devi Vs District Magistrate South East

The Director Academic Office Fostiima Business School Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.