- 11 September 2025. 1. Though we are not inclined to interfere with the merits of the judgment passed by the High Court, we, however, are of the opinion that considering the fact that the dispute in between close family members, an amicable solution should be worked out through the process of mediation. 2. Learned counsel for both the par
- 30 January 2026. 1. Heard Ms.Meenakshi Arora, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Rajesh Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondents on caveat. 2. By our last order dated 11.09.2025, we had referred the parties to mediation considering the fact that there were siblings. No doubt we had recorded a prima facie view abo
- 1 April 2026. Respondent nos. 1 to 3 are duly represented. Counter affidavit, if any, be filed in the meantime. Certificate of service in respect of respondent nos. 4 to 8 has not been received from the concerned High Court.
- 27 April 2026. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are duly represented. Service is complete on Respondent Nos. 4 and 6 to 8 but none has entered appearance.
- 20 May 2026. Respondent nos. 1 to 3 have filed counter affidavit alongwith application for exemption from filing official translation. Process as per rules. Service is complete on respondent nos. 4 and 6 to 8 but none has entered appearance.
- 24 July 2026. Respondent nos. 1 to 3 have already filed counter affidavit alongwith application for exemption from filing official translation. Service is complete on respondent nos. 4 to 8 but none has entered appearance.
- Counsel named on these orders, not a complete vakalatnama, include the advocates listed below.
Advocates — Appellants: Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Mr. Harish Pandey, Mr. Anshuman Tiwari, Mr. Manish Kumar, Ms. Aishwarya Rai Advocates — Respondents: Mr. Rajesh Srivastava, Mr. Gaurav Verma, Ms. Riddhi Gupta, Mr. Anil Kumar Gaur, Mr. Rahul Kumar
