ATUL KUMAR vs BIMLA DEVI Advocate - SUNIL KHANNA — 612897/2016

Case under Partition Section SEPRATE. Status: Misc. Arguments. Next hearing: 01st July 2026.

Civ DJ - CIVIL SUIT FOR DJ and ADJ

CNR: DLWT010039262016

Misc. Arguments

Next Hearing

01st July 2026

Filing Number

76306/2016

Filing Date

13-04-2012

Registration No

612897/2016

Registration Date

12-07-2016

Court

District and Sessions Judge, West, THC

Judge

201-District Judge

Acts & Sections

Partition Section SEPRATE
possession Section ---

Petitioner(s)

ATUL KUMAR

Adv. VINEET SHARMA

TARUN KUMAR

Adv. VINEET SHARMA

JATIN KUMAR (MINOR)

Adv. VINIT SHARMA

RUCHIKA KUMARI

Adv. VINEET SHARMA

NEHA KUMARI (MINOR)

Adv. VINEET SHARMA

Respondent(s)

BIMLA DEVI Advocate - SUNIL KHANNA

KAMLESH @ KAMLA DEVI

Adv. SUNIL KHANNA

SEEMA @ BABBLI

Adv. SUNIL KHANNA

MAMTA

Adv. SUNIL KHANNA

PUSHPA DEVI

Adv. SUNIL KHANNA

RAJNI DEIV

Adv. SUNIL KHANNA

Hearing History

Judge: 201-District Judge

13-05-2026

Misc. Arguments

15-04-2026

Misc. cases/purpose

13-03-2026

Misc. Arguments

31-01-2026

Misc. Arguments

19-12-2025

Misc. Arguments

Interim Orders

20-08-2020
COPY OF ORDER
17-11-2020
COPY OF ORDER
19-02-2021
COPY OF ORDER
05-03-2021
COPY OF ORDER
05-03-2021
COPY OF ORDER
09-03-2021
COPY OF ORDER
13-05-2026
COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS

Case Summary: In this partition suit (612897/2016), the Delhi High Court allowed the plaintiff's application under Order XXII Rule 4 CPC to implead the legal representatives (heirs) of deceased defendant no.2, ruling that the right to sue survives in partition cases. However, the court struck off an amended memo of parties that unilaterally added defendants 4A-4D without prior permission or notice, directing the plaintiff to file a fresh amended memo and seek formal approval. The matter was adjourned to 01.07.2026 for arguments on pending applications. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: In this partition suit (612897/2016), the Delhi High Court allowed the plaintiff's application under Order XXII Rule 4 CPC to implead the legal representatives (heirs) of deceased defendant no.2, ruling that the right to sue survives in partition cases. However, the court struck off an amended memo of parties that unilaterally added defendants 4A-4D without prior permission or notice, directing the plaintiff to file a fresh amended memo and seek formal approval. The matter was adjourned to 01.07.2026 for arguments on pending applications. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Sessions Judge, West, THC All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case