Disposed¶20

Santosh Bhasin v. Umari Malhotra Decd Thr Lrs

Delhi HC2 Mar 2026RFA/830/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court RFA 830/2010; Santosh Bhasin v. Umari Malhotra (Decd.) through LRs; appeal under S.96 / Order XLI Rule 1 / S.151 CPC; impugned judgment dated 20.09.2010 in suit no. 382/09/95; earlier disposal by judgment dated 10.01.2024; restoration via CM Appl. No. 5722/2024 (order dated 11.03.2024); judgment dated 11.03.2024 challenged in SLP(C) Nos. 8653-8655/2024; Supreme Court status quo direction dated 22.04.2024; settlement agreement dated 30.04.2025; appeal disposed of as not pressed; pending applications disposed of; Amit Sharma, J; 28.03.2026.

What did the court decide?

None; appeal disposed of as not pressed in view of settlement between the parties ¶20

Santosh Bhasin Vs Umari Malhotra Decd Thr Lrs — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~29

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- RFA 830/2010

¶4

SANTOSH BHASIN .....Appellant

¶5

Through: Ms. Yashi Bajpai, Advocate versus

¶6

UMARI MALHOTRA DECD THR LRS .....Respondent Through: None

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶8

O R D E R % 28.03.2026

¶9

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶10

The present matter was listed on 02.03.2026. On account of 02.03.2026 being declared as a holiday vide notification no. 64/G-4/Genl.-I/DHC dated 27.02.2026, the same is being taken up for hearing today.

¶11

The present appeal under Section 96 read with Order XLI Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the CPC, seeks the following prayers: -

¶12

“a. Set-aside the Impugned Judgment dated 20.09.2010 passed by the Ld. Trial Court in suit no. 382/09/95;

¶13

b. Decree the suit filed by the Appellant and grant the reliefs as prayed for by the Appellant in the suit, which has been dismissed by the Impugned Judgment dated 20.09.2010;

¶14

c. Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case in favour of the Appellant and against the Respondents.”

¶15

As per records, vide judgment dated 10.01.2024, the learned Predecessor Bench of this Court had disposed of the present appeal. However,

¶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 30/03/2026 at 17:36:55

¶18

vide order dated 11.03.2024, an application, being CM Appl. No. 5722/2024 , was allowed and the captioned appeal was restored to its original position and number. Thereafter, the learned Predecessor Bench of this Court had passed a judgment dated 11.03.2024, which was challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, by way of SLP(C) Nos. 8653-8655/2024 and vide order dated 22.04.2024, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had directed the parties to maintain status quo the subject property.

¶19

Learned counsel for the appellant points out that the aforesaid SLP has been disposed of on a settlement arrived at between the parties vide settlement agreement dated 30.04.2025 and in view of the same, the present appeal is not pressed.

¶20

Ergo , in view of the above, no further directions are called for. The present appeal is disposed of as not pressed and disposed of accordingly.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶24

MARCH 28, 2026 dy/db

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

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 30/03/2026 at 17:36:55

Santosh Bhasin v. Umari Malhotra Decd Thr Lrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Bhasin v. Umari Malhotra Decd Thr Lrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Universal Promoters & Developers & Ors. Vs Government of NCT Delhi & Ors.

Anjali Khurana Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi

The Competent Official/Zonal Manager National Textile Corporation Ltd. Vs Dr Renu Chandana and Anr.

Kusum Sharma (Deceased)through Legal Heirs Vs Vipin Nanda

Praveen Kuamr Vs Government of NCT & Ors.

Jitendra Madhup Vs Shwetajeet Madhup