Dismissed¶25

Savitri Devi v. Shakuntala

Delhi HC1 Apr 2026RFA/67/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Savitri Devi v. Shakuntala; RFA 67/2010; High Court of Delhi; Amit Sharma, J.; order dated 01.04.2026; appeal dismissed in default for non-prosecution; Section 96 read with Order XLI Rule 1 CPC; CM No. 2314/2010 stay application dismissed as not pressed; impugned judgment/decree dated 22.10.2009 of trial court; no appearance; court notice unserved.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed in default for non-prosecution and disposed of accordingly, in view of continued non-appearance of the appellant and the court notice having returned unserved. ¶25

Savitri Devi Vs Shakuntala — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~31

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- RFA 67/2010

¶4

SAVITRI DEVI .....Appellant

¶5

Through: None. versus

¶6

SHAKUNTALA .....Respondent Through: None.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 01.04.2026 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶10

The present appeal under Section 96 read with Order XLI Rule 1 of the CPC, seeks the following prayers:-

¶11

“a) Set aside the judgment/decree dated 22.10.2009 passed by the Ld. Trial court;

¶12

b) any further order or directions may be passed which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.”

¶13

None appears on behalf of the appellant today.

¶14

An application, CM No. 2314/2010, seeking stay on the execution of the impugned decree was preferred by the appellant. The said application was not pressed by the appellant and was dismissed by the learned Predecessor Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.09.2010. The said order is reproduced as under: -

¶15

“ + RFA NO.67/2010

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

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 06/04/2026 at 12:21:57

¶18

According to the report of the Registry, service is complete. None is present on behalf of respondents. Admit.

¶19

List in due course.

¶20

CM NO.2314/2010 (STAY)

¶21

Counsel for the appellant does not press this application, at this stage. Dismissed, as not pressed, at this stage. Liberty is granted to file a fresh application, if so advised. Application stands disposed of.”

¶22

Thereafter, no such application was filed.

¶23

There has been no appearance on behalf of the appellant on the previous dates of hearing, i.e. , 29.11.2024, 03.12.2024, 10.12.2024, 17.12.2024, 10.02.2025, 07.04.2025, 01.05.2025, 07.08.2025 and 08.12.2025, as well.

¶24

Report with regard to the Court notice issued to the parties, vide order dated 07.04.2025 passed by the learned Predecessor Bench has come back with remarks that, “unserved-(no such person)”.

¶25

In view of the above, the present appeal is dismissed in default for nonprosecution and disposed of accordingly.

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶29

APRIL 1, 2026/nk/db

¶30

This is a digitally signed order.

¶31

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 06/04/2026 at 12:21:57

Savitri Devi v. Shakuntala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Savitri Devi v. Shakuntala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pawan Dubey Vs Deepa Tuteja & Anr.

Om Parkash & Sons Vs Laxman Dass Naresh Kumar

Lt Col Vinod Kumar Aggarwal Vs Rakesh Aggarwal

Rakesh Kumar Vs Saraswati Devi

Abhishek Vs Sangeeta

Krishan Lal Vs Gs Patnaik