RAJAT KUMAR AND ANR vs NOOR JAHAN AND ORS — 15/2026

Case under Suit for Declaration Section 151. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED IN DEFAULT on 16th May 2026.

Case disposed

CS - CIVIL SUIT FOR DJ ADJ

CNR: DLNE010039452025

e-Filing Number

19-12-2025

Filing Number

1968/2025

Filing Date

24-Dec-2025

Registration No

15/2026

Registration Date

13-Jan-2026

Court

District and Sessions Judge, North-East, KKD

Judge

429-District Judge

Decision Date

16-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED IN DEFAULT

Last updated 17-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Suit for Declaration Section 151

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAJAT KUMAR AND ANR

    Adv. SANJAY KUMAR SHARMA

  2. 2.Rukmani Devi

    Adv. SANJAY KUMAR SHARMA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.NOOR JAHAN AND ORS

  2. 2.Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-May-2026

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

    The suit filed by Rajat Kumar and Rukmani Devi against Noor Jahan and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi was dismissed in default on 16.05.2026 because the plaintiffs failed to appear before the court despite repeated opportunities. The court found that the plaintiffs had not clarified issues regarding pecuniary jurisdiction or the cause of action against the defendants, indicating lack of interest in prosecuting the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-May-2026

    Disposed

    District Judge

  4. 17-Mar-2026

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

  5. 17-Mar-2026

    Misc. Arguments

    District Judge

  6. 09-Feb-2026

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

  7. 09-Feb-2026

    Misc. cases

    District Judge

  8. 20-Jan-2026

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

  9. 20-Jan-2026

    Misc. cases

    District Judge

  10. 16-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  11. 24-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 15/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The suit filed by Rajat Kumar and Rukmani Devi against Noor Jahan and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi was dismissed in default on 16.05.2026 because the plaintiffs failed to appear before the court despite repeated opportunities. The court found that the plaintiffs had not clarified issues regarding pecuniary jurisdiction or the cause of action against the defendants, indicating lack of interest in prosecuting the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case