Dismissed¶5

Smt. Jagjit Khanna v. Shri Taresh Sharma

Delhi HC5 Feb 2026RC.REV./35/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

RC.REV. 35/2022; CM APPL. 12262/2022; Jagjit Khanna v. Taresh Sharma; High Court of Delhi; Amit Sharma, J.; 05.02.2026; Section 25B(8) Delhi Rent Control Act 1958; revision petition against leave to defend; RC ARC No. 3618; Rohini Courts; ACJ-Cum-CCJ-Cum-ARC; dismissal as withdrawn; expeditious trial direction; eviction petition; no merits adjudicated.

What did the court decide?

Leave to withdraw granted; petition dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties; no substantive relief (eviction) granted; trial court requested to dispose of the trial expeditiously, preferably within a year. ¶5

Smt. Jagjit Khanna Vs Shri Taresh Sharma — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶5

Issue for consideration

Whether the revision petition under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 should be allowed so as to set aside the order dated 08.02.2022 granting the respondent leave to defend and to secure eviction of the respondent from the suit property (not adjudicated; petition dismissed as withdrawn).

¶2(a)

Ratio / Principle

The present petition is dismissed as withdrawn, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties.

¶5

Key takeaways

The learned ACJ-Cum-CCJ-Cum-ARC is requested to proceed with the trial without giving any undue adjournments to either party and to dispose of it as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a year.obiter¶6
Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.obiter¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Amit Sharma, J.), RC.REV. 35/2022 & CM APPL. 12262/2022, order dated 05.02.2026: Revision petition by landlord Smt. Jagjit Khanna under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 sought setting aside of the order dated 08.02.2022 of Shri Virender Singh, ACJ-Cum-CCJ-Cum-ARC (North), Rohini Courts, Delhi, in RC ARC No. 3618 (Smt. Jagjit Khanna Vs. Shri Taresh Sharma), whereby the tenant-respondent's leave to defend had been allowed and he was directed to file a written statement, together with eviction of the respondent. As the trial was stated to be at the evidence stage, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction, sought leave to withdraw the petition with a prayer for expeditious disposal of the trial. Without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn and disposed of accordingly; the trial court was requested to proceed without undue adjournments and dispose of the trial expeditiously, preferably within a year; pending application(s) stood disposed of. No substantive issue was adjudicated.

¶1

$~6

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- RC.REV. 35/2022 & CM APPL. 12262/2022

¶4

SMT. JAGJIT KHANNA .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. P. Batra Singh, Mr. Amitesh Giroti, Mr. Nipun Gupta and Ms. Mamita Phogat, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

SHRI TARESH SHARMA .....Respondent Through: Mr. R.R. Jangu and Mr. K.R. Jangu, Advocates.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 05.02.2026

¶12

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶13

The present petition under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, seeks the following prayers:

¶14

“(a) allow the present Petition; set aside the Impugned Order dated 08.02.2022 passed by Shri Virender Singh, ACJ-CumCCJ-Cum-ARC (North) Rohini Courts, Delhi in RC ARC No. 3618 [CNR No. DLNT03-001737-2018] titled as Smt. Jagjit Khanna Vs. Shri Taresh Sharma with costs throughout and the Petitioner be granted eviction of the Respondent from the suit property; and

¶15

(b) pass any other further orders that it may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case;”

¶16

Vide order dated 08.02.2022, learned ACJ-Cum-CCJ-Cum-ARC had allowed the application seeking leave to defend filed on behalf of the respondent and directed him to file a written statement.

¶17

This is a digitally signed order.

¶18

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 09/02/2026 at 12:38:27

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter is presently at the stage of evidence, and on instruction, seeks leave to withdraw the present petition with a prayer for expeditious disposal of trial.

¶20

In these circumstances, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn and disposed of accordingly.

¶21

Learned ACJ-Cum-CCJ-Cum-ARC is requested to proceed with the trial without giving any undue adjournments to either of the parties and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a year from today.

¶22

Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶23

Copy of the order be sent to the concerned learned ACJ-Cum-CCJCum-ARC, North District, Rohini Courts, Delhi, for necessary information and compliance.

¶24

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court, forthwith .

¶25

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶26

FEBRUARY 5, 2026/SH

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

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 09/02/2026 at 12:38:27

Smt. Jagjit Khanna v. Shri Taresh Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Jagjit Khanna v. Shri Taresh Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pankaj Jain Vs Parul Jain

Mohd Azam Khan Vs Zulfiqr Ahmed

Ms Des Raj Jewellers Vs Sh Mukesh Khanna

Sonu Vs Smt Anita Gupta

Sandeep Sirpal Vs Vanika

Dr Dheeraj Kapoor Vs Dr Chetna Manaktala