Delhi High Court - Orders
Vinod Kumar Dhingra vs M/S Alankit Assignments Ltd on 21 January, 2026
$~75
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ RC.REV. 18/2018
VINOD KUMAR DHINGRA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. A. Maitri, Ms. Radhika
Kushaldas, Ms. Parul Sahram and
Mr. Rakshit Upadhyay, Advs.
Versus
M/S ALANKIT ASSIGNMENTS LTD .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Shiv Charan Garg and Mr.
Puneet Asthana, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
ORDER
% 21.01.2026 CM APPL. 4191/2026 (for exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application is disposed of.
CM APPL. 4190/2026 (Delay of 6 days and to exempt the time period from 07.01.2026 to 14.01.2026 in calculating the limitation period)
3. By virtue of the present application, the petitioner/ tenant seeks condonation of a delay of six days in filing CM APPL. 4189/2026.
4. Taking into account the period for which condonation of delay is sought, the present application, for the reasons stated therein, is allowed.
5. The application is disposed of.
CM APPL. 4189/2026 (By petitioner for recalling of order dated 09.12.2025)
6. By virtue of the present application, the tenant seeks recalling of the order dated 09.12.2025 passed by this Court, whereby the stay granted in favour of the tenant vide the earlier order dated 31.01.2018 was vacated.
7. It is case of the tenant that the order dated 09.12.2025 has been 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 22/01/2026 at 20:40:00 passed without taking into consideration the interim orders dated 31.01.2018 and 23.02.2023, pursuant whereto the tenant had been paying the user and occupation charges to the respondent/ landlord as fixed by this Court, and hence, the stay granted in his favour was wrongly vacated.
8. In furtherance thereof, learned counsel for the tenant submits that the landlord, on the strength of the order dated 09.12.2025, subsequently filed execution proceedings before the learned Executing Court and the tenant has to now vacate the subject premises on or before 30.01.2026 as per the warrants of possession issued by the learned Executing Court. He hence submits that the tenant will suffer irreparable injury if the said order dated 09.12.2025 passed by this Court is not recalled.
9. Issue notice.
10. Learned counsel for the landlord accepts notice, and, opposing the present application, submits that the same has been filed belatedly, especially since the order dated 09.12.2025 was passed in the presence of learned counsel for the tenant, and yet, no objections thereto have been taken till date. He further submits that the execution proceedings were initiated by the landlord in accordance with law, and in fact, pursuant thereto, the possession of the subject premises has already been restored in favour of the landlord on 14.01.2026.
11. Even otherwise, learned counsel submits that the present application is without merit, since the order of stay dated 23.02.2023 was passed in CM APPL. 2402/2018 and the order dated 09.12.2025 for which recalling has been sought was passed in the main petition being RC.REV. 18/2018.
12. Learned counsel for the tenant, in rejoinder, though reemphasising on the arguments urged by him before, however, does not dispute that the 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 22/01/2026 at 20:40:00 subject premises has since been vacated by the tenant on 14.01.2026.
13. This Court has heard learned counsels for the parties.
14. Considering the admitted position that the subject premises has since been vacated by the tenant on 14.01.2026, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.C. Daga vs. Inder Mohan Singh Rana:2003 (1) SCC 453 and Vinod Kumar Verma vs. Manmohan Verma & Anr.:Civil Appeal Nos.5220-5221 of 2008, order dated 19.08.2008, there is nothing remaining for consideration by this Court in the present application as the captioned petition itself has, per se, become infructuous, and this Court is functus officio. It is too late in the day for the tenant to now seek any relief from this Court, particularly whence there is hardly anything remaining to be considered on merits after he has been dispossessed already.
15. Even otherwise, on merits as well there is nothing in the present application by way of reasons qua what has been recorded by this Court categorically in paragraph no.2 of the order dated 09.12.2025 as under:-
"2. Considering the petitioner is enjoying a stay since 31.01.2018 and thereafter has been repeatedly seeking adjournments on one pretext or another, the interim order granting stay is vacated."
16. In view of the aforesaid, the present application, being infructuous, as well as devoid of any merit, is dismissed.
RC.REV. 18/201817. List before the Roster Bench on the date already fixed, i.e. 11.02.2026.
SAURABH BANERJEE, J JANUARY 21, 2026/bh 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 22/01/2026 at 20:40:00