Interim Order 6

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: RCA DJ 178/25
RAVINDER GUPTA Vs. SUNITA GUPTA
30.07.2026
Present: Sh. Aru Vashisht, Ld. Proxy Counsel for Sh. Abhinav
Sekri, Ld Counsel for appellant. (appearing through
VC)
None for the respondents.
The matter is listed for 2.30 pm. Accordingly, let the
matter be passed over and be put up at 2.30 pm.
(NEERAJ SHARMA)
District Judge-04(Central)
Tis Hazari Courts Delhi
30.07.2026
At 2.30 pm.
Present: Sh. Abhinav Sekri (appearing through VC) & Sh.
Aru Vashisht, Ld Counsel for appellant.
Appellant is appearing through VC.
Sh. Amit Bhatnagar, Ld. Counsel for the respondent
no.1 and respondent no.1 (appearing through VC)
Respondent no.2 (appearing through VC).
Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court with a
view to exploring the possibility of an amicable settlement, the
parties have appeared before the Court through VC. The Court
interacted with both the parties at considerable length. It is
noticed that the appellant and the respondents are senior citizens
and siblings, therefore, this Court considered it appropriate to
-- 1 of 3 --
make an earnest endeavour to facilitate a mutually acceptable
resolution so as to avoid further protracted litigation.
Despite the sincere efforts made by the Court and the
opportunity afforded to the parties to resolve their disputes
amicably, the discussions did not yield any positive outcome.
The respective stands of the parties continue to remain
irreconcilable. In view of the categorical stand taken by the
parties during the course of interaction, this Court is satisfied
that, at this stage, there exists no reasonable possibility of an
amicable settlement. Accordingly, the matter is required to
proceed for adjudication on merits.
At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent has
raised a preliminary objection that the appellant has failed to
implead all the parties who were arrayed before the learned Trial
Court in the present appeal. It is submitted that, in the absence of
all the necessary parties, effective adjudication of the appeal may
not be possible and the appeal suffers from a procedural defect
which requires rectification.
In response, learned proxy counsel appearing for the
appellant fairly submits that the omission was inadvertent and
undertakes to file an amended Memo of Parties by impleading all
the necessary parties who had been arrayed before the learned
Trial Court. Since the defect pointed out is procedural in nature
and is capable of being cured, and having regard to the settled
principle that procedural laws are intended to advance the cause
-- 2 of 3 --
of justice rather than defeat it, this Court deems it appropriate to
grant the appellant an opportunity to rectify the said defect.
Accordingly, the appellant is directed to file the
amended Memo of Parties within one week, after duly
impleading all the necessary parties, with an advance copy to the
learned counsel for the respondent. Upon the amended Memo of
Parties being filed, the respondents shall be at liberty to file a
reply, if any, on or before the next date of hearing, with an
advance copy to the learned counsel for the appellant.
List the matter for arguments on the appeal on
24.09.2026.
(NEERAJ SHARMA)
District Judge-04(Central)
Tis Hazari Courts Delhi
30.07.2026
-- 3 of 3 --