Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Ravi Dutt Sharma vs Krishna Kumar Sharma on 8 December, 2025

                       $~1
                       *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                       +         EX.F.A. 55/2025, CM APPL. 74789-74790/2025, CM APPL.
                                 76939/2025,

                                 RAVI DUTT SHARMA                                                    .....Appellant
                                              Through:                             Mr. Rajnish Ranjan, Advocate.

                                                               versus

                                 KRISHNA KUMAR SHARMA                                                            .....Respondent
                                             Through: None.

                                 CORAM:
                                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
                                                               ORDER

% 08.12.2025 CM APPL. 77183/2025 (By the appellant for the appeal being read under Order 21 Rule 103 and Rule 104 of CPC instead of Order 21 Rule 103 and Rule 58 of CPC)

1. By virtue of the present application, the appellant has prayed that the captioned appeal be read under Order 21 Rule 103 and Rule 104 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) instead of Order 21 Rule 103 and Rule 58 CPC.

2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.

3. The application stands disposed of.

CM APPL.74790/2025 (Exemption)

4. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

5. The application stands disposed of.

This is a digitally signed order.

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 09/12/2025 at 20:56:22 CM APPL. 76939/2025 (early hearing by the applicant)

6. By virtue of the present application, the applicant seeks early hearing of the appeal.

7. Since the appeal is being heard today, learned counsel for the appellant seeks to withdraw the present application.

8. The application is dismissed as withdrawn.

EX.F.A. 55/2025, CM APPL. 74789/2025 (stay)

9. By virtue of the present appeal, the appellant seeks an order allowing his objection filed in Ex. 68/2025 passed on 14.11.2025 and an order directing the learned Trial Court to conduct enquiry and decide the aspect of title in the suit property in accordance with law.

10. It is the case of the appellant that he is the son of late Smt. Raj Kumari from her first marriage with Mr. Brahm Dutt Sharma and that three children viz. Mr. Ravi Dutt Sharma (appellant herein), Ms. Praveen Phull and Ms. Indra Jyoti were born out of the said wedlock. After death of Sh. Brahm Dutt Sharma, Smt. Raj Kumari remarried one Mr. Krishna Kumar Sharma (respondent herein) and out of the said wedlock, a son, Mr. Akash Raman Sharma was also born.

11. The respondent, executed a registered Gift Deed on 24.04.2008 in respect of the suit property/ Flat bearing No. 48-B, First to Third Floor DDA Janta Flats, Phase-II, Katwaria Sarai, New Delhi-110016 (suit property) in favour his wife Smt. Raj Kumari, who then executed a Will dated 26.04.2008 in respect of the same in the favour of appellant.

12. The appellant then filed a probate case being PC no. 31/2019 entitled "Ravi Dutt Sharma v. State" seeking probate of the said Will.

This is a digitally signed order.

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 09/12/2025 at 20:56:22

13. Subsequent to the death of Smt. Raj Kumari on 26.02.2014, the respondent instituted a suit bearing no. 43/2017 entitled "K.K. Sharma vs. Akash Raman Sharma" before the learned District Judge-05, District South, Saket, Delhi, without impleading the appellant as a party therein. The same was for cancellation of the Gift Deed, which was finally disposed of by a consent decree dated 06.05.2017.

14. Against the said consent decree dated 06.05.2017, the appellant instituted a suit bearing number CS SCJ No. 910/2019 seeking declaration of compromise decree dated 06.05.2017 as null and void. The said suit is still pending adjudication before learned ASCJ-cum-JSCC-cum-GJ (South), Saket Courts, as on date.

15. In the interregnum, the respondent instituted a fresh suit for ejectment, being CS no. 1048/2017, against the appellant, which culminated into passing of the judgment and decree dated 19.02.2025, execution of which was filed before the learned Executing Court.

16. The appellant, upon being served therein, filed an appropriate application under Order XXI Rule(s) 100 & 101 read with Sections 41 & 151 CPC raising objections therein. The same, have been dismissed vide the impugned order passed by the learned Executing Court.

17. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant has preferred the present appeal challenging the impugned order dated 14.11.2025.

18. Learned counsel for the appellant while drawing the attention of this Court to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Periammal (Dead) through LRs. & Ors. Vs. Rajamani & Ors.: (2025) 9 SCC 568, submits that by virtue of the provisions of Order XXI Rule(s) 97 & 101 CPC, it is open for any Judgment Debtor, like the appellant herein, or any EX.F.A. 55/2025 Page 3 of 4 This is a digitally signed order.

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 09/12/2025 at 20:56:22 third person to raise an issue of tittle, which, has to be decided by the learned Executing Court.

19. Learned counsel the appellant further submits that since the probate proceedings qua Will dated 26.04.2008, executed by Smt. Raj Kumari, were still pending, in view of the categoric findings by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Periammal (Dead) through LRs. & Ors. (supra), the learned Executing Court has committed an error in passing the impugned order.

20. Upon the petitioner taking steps within a week, issue notice by all modes to the respondents.

21. Let e-copy of the Trial Court Record be requisitioned within a period of four weeks.

22. In the meanwhile, the parties are directed to file their respective written synopsis not exceeding five pages, giving a chronological list of dates and events and relevant documents, if any, alongwith duly highlighted judgments setting out the propositions of law therein, they wish to rely upon within a period of four weeks after receiving of TCR.

23. Lastly, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Periammal (Dead) through LRs. & Ors. (supra) as the objections have simply been dismissed on the grounds that the learned Executing Court could not go behind the decree summarily, the impugned order dated 14.11.2025 shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.

24. Renotify on 17.03.2026.

SAURABH BANERJEE, J DECEMBER 8, 2025/NA EX.F.A. 55/2025 Page 4 of 4 This is a digitally signed order.

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 09/12/2025 at 20:56:22