SUMAN LATA SINGH vs MANOJ KUMAR RAMEHS CHANDRE AGGARWAL — 1248/2022
Case under Recovery of Money Section 74. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 30th May 2026.
CS DJ - CIVIL SUIT FOR DJ and ADJ
CNR: DLCT010165232022
Filing Number
9615/2022
Filing Date
01-12-2022
Registration No
1248/2022
Registration Date
02-12-2022
Court
District and Sessions Judge, Central, THC
Judge
9-District Judge
Decision Date
30th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SUMAN LATA SINGH
Adv. MAHESH KUMAR SHARMA
Respondent(s)
MANOJ KUMAR RAMEHS CHANDRE AGGARWAL
Hearing History
Judge: 9-District Judge
Disposed
Final Arguments
Defendant/Respondent Evidence
Defendant/Respondent Evidence
Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 28-04-2026 | Final Arguments |
| 13-03-2026 | Defendant/Respondent Evidence |
| 19-02-2026 | Defendant/Respondent Evidence |
| 26-11-2025 | Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Delhi District Court dismissed Suman Lata Singh's defamation suit against Manoj Kumar Ramesh Chandre Aggarwal, finding that the plaintiff failed to prove publication of defamatory statements or quantifiable losses. The court noted critical evidentiary gaps: no witnesses to alleged defamatory messages, unproven digital screenshots lacking Section 65B certificates, no income documentation, and hearsay testimony from the plaintiff herself about WhatsApp group messages she wasn't part of. Additionally, the plaintiff imposed costs of Rs 3,000 on the plaintiff for filing vexatious litigation following the defendant's prior recovery suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
The Delhi District Court dismissed Suman Lata Singh's defamation suit against Manoj Kumar Ramesh Chandre Aggarwal, finding that the plaintiff failed to prove publication of defamatory statements or quantifiable losses. The court noted critical evidentiary gaps: no witnesses to alleged defamatory messages, unproven digital screenshots lacking Section 65B certificates, no income documentation, and hearsay testimony from the plaintiff herself about WhatsApp group messages she wasn't part of. Additionally, the plaintiff imposed costs of Rs 3,000 on the plaintiff for filing vexatious litigation following the defendant's prior recovery suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts