Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court

M3M India Private Limited vs Bhavya Doshi & Anr on 24 March, 2026

                          $~80
                          *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                                                    Date of Decision: 24th March, 2026
                          +      CM(M) 618/2026
                                 M3M INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED                .....Petitioner
                                               Through: Mr. Manish K. Jha, Senior Advocate
                                                        with Mr. Raymon Singh, Mr.
                                                        Himanshu Mishra, Ms. Mahima Rai,
                                                        Ms. Astha Sarin and Mr. Rajat Juneja,
                                                        Advs.
                                               versus
                                 BHAVYA DOSHI & ANR.                             .....Respondents
                                              Through:           Ms. Ishita Singh and Ms. Pranjal
                                                                 Mishra, Advs.

                                 CORAM:
                                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
                                                          ORDER (Oral)

Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J.

1. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode.

2. Learned Counsel for the respondents has entered appearance, therefore, the caveat stands discharged.

CM APPL. 18646/2026 (for Exemption)

3. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. CM(M) 618/2026, & CM APPL. 18645/2026 (for Stay)

4. The present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, assailing the order dated 16th March, 2026 passed by the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ("State Commission") in Execution Application No. Signature Not Verified Signed By:NAMITA CM(M) 618/2026 Page 1 of 2 DHYANI Signing Date:25.03.2026 11:25:46 SC/7/EA/19/2026.

5. Learned Counsel for the respondents appeared on advance notice and accepts notice.

6. Heard. Record perused.

7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is liable to be set aside as warrants of attachment have been ordered against the properties of the third parties.

8. A perusal of the record shows that the said third parties have not challenged that impugned order. On this aspect, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in case the warrants of attachment have been stayed, the petitioner, i.e., M3M India Private Limited, is ready to pay 50% of the decretal amount to the decree holder within a period of 15 days from today and which would be without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner.

9. Subject to payment of 50% of the decretal amount by the petitioner to the respondent/decree holder within a period of 15 days from today, the operation of the warrants of attachment shall remain stayed and such payment shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties. In the event of failure to pay the said amount within that stipulated period, the interim protection granted shall stand automatically vacated.

10. The petition is disposed of in the above-stated terms. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. All rights and contentions of the parties are left open.

RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J MARCH 24, 2026/sds/tp Signature Not Verified Signed By:NAMITA CM(M) 618/2026 Page 2 of 2 DHYANI Signing Date:25.03.2026 11:25:46