Interim Order 3

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: Succ. Court 130/24
BABY Vs. THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI)
29.03.2025
Present : Mr. Rahul Rohtagi and Mr. Syed Ajmal Hasan, Ld. Counsel for petitioner.
Matter is listed for arguments on the aspect of the petitioner making the respondent
no.2/ court of Ld. MACT, Tis Hazari Courts, in the present petition as a necessary party. This
court has heard the submissions of the petitioner on this aspect on 14.01.2025 as well, whereby
the petitioner sought some time to place on record certain judgments as per which the Ld.
Presiding Officer of a Court in the exercise of his judicial authority, can be made a necessary party
in the proceedings. Two judgments in this regard have been relied upon by the petitioner today i.e.
Udit Narain Singh Malpaharia Vs. Additional Member, Board of Revenue [AIR (1963) SC 786],
decided on 19.10.1962; and Savita Devi Vs. District Judge, Gorakhpur and Ors. [AIR (1999) SC
976], decided on 18.02.1999. Bare perusal of the said judgments shows that they do not support
the case of the petitioner and in the the considered opinion of this Court, the respondent no.2 i.e.
the court concerned where the money was deposited in favour of the deceased is neither a
necessary nor a proper party. Needless to say, the petitioner can file the relevant record of the said
case listed before the said court at the appropriate stage and the petitioner may also summon the
relevant record from the concerned court at the relevant stage.
After some arguments, Ld. Counsel for petitioner has sought to amend the present
petition.
In view of such submissions, petitioner is given liberty to amend the present
petition and file an appropriate application in this regard alongwith the amended petition within a
week from today.
Be put up for further proceedings on 29.05.2025.
(Bharat Aggarwal)
ACJ-cum-ARC, Central
District, Tis Hazari Courts
29.03.2025
-- 1 of 1 --