Order 12

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 23 RCA DJ 35/24
KAVITA SHARMA Vs. Harish Chand
08.04.2026
Present: Sh. Deepak Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the appellant
alongwith appellant.
Sh. Atul Sharma, Ld. LAC for respondent no. 1.
None for respondent no. 2.
Sh. Yashbir Thakur, Ld. Counsel for the respondents
no. 3 & 4 (through VC).
Clarification alongwith copy of affidavit on behalf
of appellant filed. Copy supplied.
On the last date (12.02.2026), Ld. Counsel for
respondent no. 1 had raised an objection, in the connected appeal
pending between the same parties bearing no. RCA DJ No.
34/2024, regarding the territorial jurisdiction of this court to try
and entertain the instant appeal.
Arguments heard. Record perused.
The instant appeal was filed on 12.08.2024,
whereby the appellant has challenged the judgment dt.
10.07.2024, whereby the suit of the appellant for declaration,
mandatory and permanent injunction, recovery of rent and
recovery of possession of property i.e. Plot no.5, Khasra no.242,
Main Mandoli Road, Village Mandoli, Ilaqa Shahdara, Delhi was
dismissed by Ld. Sr. Civil Judge, East.
The suit property is situated in Village Mandoli and
the area of Village Mandoli falls within the territorial jurisdiction
of Shahdara District Vide notification no. 5/DHC, Gaz. /G-1/ VI.
E-2 (a)/2013 dt. 19.02.2013, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court
directed that the fresh cases had to be presented, filed or
-- 1 of 3 --
-2-
allocated in accordance with the jurisdiction assigned to the
respective Courts.
In view of the aforesaid notification, this Court has
no territorial jurisdiction to proceed with the present appeal as
the suit property is located in Village Mandoli, Delhi and the
fresh cases /appeal had to be filed in accordance with the
jurisdiction i.e. in Shahdara District.
Ld. Counsel for the appellant urges that the
judgment was passed by Ld. Sr. Civil Judge, East District, hence,
the appeal would also lie in the East District. Ld. counsel for
respondent no. 1, per contra, submits that irrespective of the fact
that the decision was rendered by Ld. Sr. Civil Judge, East
District, the appeal had to be filed in Shahdara District in
compliance of the aforesaid notification.
A similar issue came up for consideration before
Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Suresh Kirar Vs. Prem Sagar CM
(M) 512/2017 dt. 12.05.2017, wherein it was observed as under:-
“
4. Today, report has been receivd from the Registry which is
to the following effect:-
Pursuant to direction of the Hon’ble Court, the undersigned
has spoken to the District & Sessions Judge (HQ), Delhi today, who
has informed that as per practice being followed the appeal against the
judgment/ order in the suits which were filed before the bifurcation of
NCT of Delhi into 11 separate districts are decided after such
bifurcation are being filed in the district where the territorial
jurisdiction lies i.e. where the subject matter of the suit situate.
5. In view of the situation being clarified, the petitioner can
file the appeal in the district having territorial jurisdiction over the
subject matter.”
-- 2 of 3 --
-3-
In the light of the aforesaid judgment, the instant
appeal should have been filed in the district having territorial
jurisdiction over the subject matter i.e. Shahdara District.
At this stage, Ld. counsel for appellant submits that
he wishes to file a transfer petition before Hon’ble Delhi High
Court. Appropriate steps in this regard be taken within 15 days
from today.
At his request, matter is adjourned.
Renotify the matter for further proceedings on
08.06.2026.
Copy of the order be given dasti.
(SHUCHI LALER)
District Judge-02 (East),
Karkardooma Courts/08.04.2026
-- 3 of 3 --