Parkash Chander Aggarwal & Ors. vs Deepak Khullar & Anr.
- Court
- Delhi High Court
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 15.10.2026
# CNR No. DLHC010435912026
+ FAO 295/2026
PARKASH CHANDER AGGARWAL & ORS. .....Appellants
Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Kanishk
Ahuja, Advocate
versus
DEEPAK KHULLAR & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. H. S. Phoolka, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Deepak
Vohra, Mr. Yuvv Wadhwa, Mr.
Kartik Goyal, and Ms. Surpreet
Kaur, Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
CM APPL. 62555/2026 (permission to file lengthy synopsis)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The present application is disposed of in the above terms.
FAO 295/2026 & CM APPL. 62553/2026 (stay)
1. By way of the present appeal, the appellants seek to assail the
order dated 11.07.2026 passed by the learned District Judge-05, West
District, Tis Hazari Courts, in CS DJ No. 55 of 2026 , whereby the
application filed by the appellants under Order XL Rules 3 & 4 read
with Section 151 CPC, seeking enforcement of the duties of the Court-
appointed Receiver, came to be dismissed.
Signature Not Verified
FAO 295/2026 Page 1 of 10
Digitally Signed
By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI
Signing Date:17.10.2026
17:16:50
2. The appellants are defendant nos. 1, 2, and 4 before the Trial
Court, while the respondents are plaintiff nos. 1 and 2. For
convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to by their status
before this Court. Pertinently, during the pendency of the present
appeal, appellant no. 3, who was declared elected as Secretary in the
election held on 12.07.2026, has withdrawn his challenge to the
impugned order, and the appeal is thus confined to appellant nos. 1
and 2.
3. The dispute pertains to the management of Shri Shiv Mandir
Sanatan Dharam Sabha (Regd.), Jaidev Park, Bhagwan Das Nagar,
New Rohtak Road, New Delhi – 110026 (hereinafter “the Sabha ”), a
society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The
Sabha runs a temple, a physiotherapy centre, and a school, namely
Shiv Mandir Saraswati Bal Vidyalaya , in which approximately 600
students are studying. The appellants and the respondents represent
two rival factions within the Sabha .
4. The respondents were the office bearers of the Sabha elected in
July 2023, with respondent no. 1/ Sh. Deepak Khullar as Secretary and
respondent no. 2/ Sh. Ravi Prakash Kharakia as President. Disputes
thereafter arose between the parties regarding the holding of fresh
elections, which led to more than one round of litigation. The
appellants claim that they were elected as the new office bearers of the
Sabha in elections held on 09.11.2025. The respondents deny that any
elections were held on that date. They thereafter scheduled elections of
their own for 04.01.2026, which were stayed vide order dated
26.12.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge in CS SCJ No.
Signature Not Verified
FAO 295/2026 Page 2 of 10
Digitally Signed
By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI
Signing Date:17.10.2026
17:16:50
1949/2025 , a suit filed by the appellants’ side.
5. It was in this backdrop that the respondents instituted the
underlying suit seeking, inter alia , a declaration that the elections held
on 09.11.2025 are illegal, void, and non est , along with consequential
injunctions. Along with the suit, the respondents moved applications
under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC, Order XL Rule 1 CPC, and
Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC.
6. The Trial Court decided the three applications by a common
order dated 13.04.2026. It restrained both sides from discharging any
functions as members of the Executive Committee, from interfering in
the day-to-day management of the Sabha and the school, and from
inducting any new member with effect from 17.01.2026. This restraint
was to remain in force till the disposal of the suit or the declaration of
the final result of the elections, whichever was earlier. The Trial Court
also appointed a learned Principal District & Sessions Judge (Retd.) as
Receiver for the limited purpose of conducting fresh elections of the
Sabha . The members whose membership amount stood deposited in
the bank account of the Sabha till 17.01.2026 were held eligible to
vote, and the learned Receiver was directed to hand over the result of
the elections to the Trial Court in a sealed cover, to be made public
only upon its further directions.
7. Subsequently, vide order dated 23.05.2026 passed on an
application by defendant nos. 1 to 11 under Order XXXIX Rule 4
CPC, the order dated 13.04.2026 was modified to the limited extent of
expanding the category of persons eligible to vote. The respondents
assailed the said order before this Court in FAO No. 193/2026 , which
Signature Not Verified
FAO 295/2026 Page 3 of 10
Digitally Signed
By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI
Signing Date:17.10.2026
17:16:50
came to be dismissed as withdrawn on 14.10.2026.
8. During the course of the election process, the appellants
objected before the learned Receiver to the inclusion of 13 persons in
the list of voters. The learned Receiver, however, retained the said
names in the final list of voters published on 22.06.2026. The
appellants then moved the subject application under Order XL Rules 3
& 4 read with Section 151 CPC before the Trial Court, wherein, while
conceding the eligibility of 2 out of the 13 persons, they alleged that
the remaining 11 persons were neither original members of the Sabha
nor had paid the membership amount in terms of the order dated
13.04.2026, and prayed as under:
“ a. allow the present application and pass the necessary
orders/directions for enforcement of the duties of the Ld.
Receiver, thereby striking out of the names of the 11 persons
mentioned in the para no. 7 of this application (excluding Mr.
Ravi Gupta- Serial No. 13 and Mr. Pawan Jain- Serial No.
229);
b. Restrain the Ld. Receiver from inducting any new members
beyond those recognized by this Hon'ble Court in the present
suit;
c. Pass necessary directions/orders for enforcement of the duties
of the Ld. Receiver to supervise the payments of the salaries of
the employees/staffs of the physiotherapy centre, honorarium of
the priest, an electricity and other utility bills to the respective
persons and the department for the previous month of June,
2026, under the signatures of the present authorised
signatories of the Sabha and fixing an earliest date in this
regard;
d. Confirm the order passed in the para c above to continue
making the payment until the new Managing Committee (post
the elections of 2026) is appointed and become the authorised
signatory of the Sabha.
e. Pass such other or further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case
and in the interest of justice. ”
Signature Not Verified
FAO 295/2026 Page 4 of 10
Digitally Signed
By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI
Signing Date:17.10.2026
17:16:50
9. The respondents opposed the subject application, contending,
inter alia , that it was an attempt to stall the ongoing election process,
that the 11 persons could not be removed from the list of voters
without being made a party to the application or the suit or being
heard, and that once the elections were declared, no previous member
of the Sabha be permitted to sign any document or cheque in the name
of the Sabha . Vide the impugned order dated 11.07.2026, the Trial
Court dismissed the application, holding as under:
“ … this Court is of the opinion that inclusion of the 11
names (challenged by applicants before this Court) by learned
Receiver is prima facie reasonable and justified and cannot be
ordered to be removed from the list of eligible voters. This Court is
also of the opinion that any last minute change in the list of eligible
voters would not only affect the ongoing election process but also
create an unrest in the voters who are scheduled to vote on
12.07.2026. Such a course would be unwarranted in the given facts
and circumstances.
Accordingly, the application moved by D-1, D-2 & D-
4/applicants seeking enforcement of duties of the Receiver including
a direction for striking out of the names of 11 persons, is dismissed
being not made out. The request for payment of salaries and utility
bills shall be considered on the next dated already fixed in the main
case i.e. 13.07.2026. The application stands disposed of
accordingly. ”
Aggrieved by the same, the appellants have preferred the
present appeal. Pertinently, the fresh elections have since been held
under the supervision of the learned Receiver, and the respondents’
faction has been declared to be elected.
10. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for appellant nos. 1 & 2
submits that under the bye-laws of the Sabha , elections are to be held
every year and the tenure of the Managing Committee is of 1 year. On
this basis, it is submitted that since the elections have not been set
Signature Not Verified
FAO 295/2026 Page 5 of 10
Digitally Signed
By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI
Signing Date:17.10.2026
17:16:50
aside, the Managing Committee elected on 09.11.2025 continues to
hold office till 09.11.2026. During the course of arguments, learned
Senior Counsel, on instructions, did not press prayers (a) and (b) of the
application qua the election held on 12.07.2026, with liberty to assail
the same by way of independent proceedings, and confined the
challenge to prayers (c) and (d) only, limiting the request to the
Managing Committee elected on 09.11.2025 being permitted to
manage the affairs of the Sabha till 09.11.2026. In the alternative, it
was prayed that the learned Receiver be permitted to continue to look
after the affairs of the Sabha till 09.11.2026.
11. Per contra , learned counsel for the respondents supports the
impugned order and submits that the elections were conducted by the
learned Receiver as per the directions of the Trial Court and the result
of the same has been recorded by the Trial Court vide its order dated
18.07.2026. It was contended that the margin of votes between the
candidates of the appellants and those of the respondents was more
than 11, and therefore the inclusion of the 11 persons objected to could
not have affected the outcome. It was further pointed out that the
parties have been involved in multiple rounds of litigation, including
CS SCJ No. 1006/2024 , CS SCJ No. 1440/2025 , and CS SCJ No.
1949/2025 , apart from the present proceedings.
12. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and gone
through the record.
13. The appellants have not pressed prayers (a) and (b) of the
subject application before this Court, vide which they had sought the
striking out of the names of the 11 persons who, as per the appellants,
Signature Not Verified
FAO 295/2026 Page 6 of 10
Digitally Signed
By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI
Signing Date:17.10.2026
17:16:50
were neither original members of the Sabha nor had paid the
membership amount in terms of the order dated 13.04.2026, and a
restraint upon the induction of new members. The said 11 persons are
not before this Court, and the Trial Court’s order dated 18.07.2026,
whereby the result came to be recorded, is now sought to be assailed
independently. It also cannot be lost sight of that the validity of the
elections held on 09.11.2025 is the very subject matter of the pending
suit, and other proceedings between the parties are stated to be
pending. In view of the request made on behalf of the appellants, this
Court refrains from expressing any opinion on the inclusion of the said
11 persons or on the prayer for setting aside the election held on
12.07.2026.
14. What survive for consideration are the limited requests that the
Managing Committee elected on 09.11.2025 be permitted to manage
the affairs of the Sabha till 09.11.2026, or, in the alternative, that the
learned Receiver be permitted to continue to look after the affairs of
the Sabha till then. To examine these requests, it is necessary to bear
in mind the context in which the learned Receiver came to be
appointed. The suit was instituted by the respondents to challenge the
very election of the appellants held on 09.11.2025, and it was on the
respondents’ application in that suit that the Trial Court, vide order
dated 13.04.2026, appointed the learned Receiver. The reasons behind
the Trial Court’s decision have been laid down in the said order as
follows:
“ 41. In the backdrop of conflicting claims and, the nature of
dispute and the aforesaid precedent, this Court finds that the
cumulative circumstances emerging from the record unmistakably
Signature Not Verified
FAO 295/2026 Page 7 of 10
Digitally Signed
By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI
Signing Date:17.10.2026
17:16:50
disclose the existence of a situation warranting exercise of
discretionary jurisdiction under Order XL Rule 1 of the Code of
Civil Procedure. The material placed before the Court prima facie
reflects the presence of serious and competing claims relating to the
control, administration and management of the Sabha, which have
already resulted in multiplicity of proceedings between the parties
and have substantially impaired the smooth functioning of the
institution. The dispute is not confined to private inter se rights but
directly impacts a public religious and charitable body engaged in
various activities. The continuing conflict between rival parties has
created administrative uncertainty and an atmosphere conducive to
mismanagement thereby posing a real and imminent risk to the
preservation of institutional records, movable assets, financial
documents and other properties forming the subject matter of the
present suit.
42. In such circumstances, permitting either party to exclusively
retain control may lead to further complications, potential loss or
alteration of records and creation of irreversible situations
prejudicial to fair adjudication. This Court is, therefore, satisfied
that the present matter falls within the exceptional category where
judicial intervention through appointment of a neutral Receiver
becomes necessary. The appointment of a neutral Receiver, in the
facts of the present case, would neither prejudice the rights of either
party nor amount to adjudication of merits. Thus, this Court finds it
just, proper and necessary to allow the present application.
43. In the light of aforesaid discussion, this Court deems it
appropriate, in the interest of justice and for ensuring proper
administration of the affairs of the Sabha, to appoint an
independent authority for conducting the elections of the Sabha.
Accordingly, it is hereby directed that a Receiver be appointed who
shall be a retired District & Sessions Judge, possessing the
requisite experience and neutrality to oversee the electoral process
of the Sabha in a fair and transparent manner. In the present case
Shri Vinay Kumar Gupta, Principal District & Sessions Judge
(Retd.), contact no. XXXXXXXXXX is hereby appointed a Receiver
for the aforesaid purpose of conducting the elections of the Sabha
strictly in accordance with the applicable rules, and bye-laws of the
Sabha.
44. Upon such appointment and subject to the consent of the
proposed Receiver, the said Receiver shall assume charge for the
limited purpose of conducting fresh elections of the Sabha strictly in
accordance with the applicable bye-laws, rules, and governing
regulations of the Sabha. The Receiver shall initiate the process of
elections forthwith and shall endeavour to complete the entire
electoral exercise within a period of six weeks from the date of
Signature Not Verified
FAO 295/2026 Page 8 of 10
Digitally Signed
By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI
Signing Date:17.10.2026
17:16:50
acceptance of the appointment.
xxx xxx xxx
48. Upon completion of the electoral process, the final results of
the elections shall be duly compiled and sealed by the Receiver and
handed over to this Court. However, the declaration and
publication of the final election results shall remain withheld and
the same shall only be disclosed before this Hon'ble Court and shall
be made public strictly upon further directions of this Court. ”
15. A reading of the above makes it evident that the Trial Court,
faced with rival claims qua the control of the Sabha , consciously
chose not to leave the management in the hands of either faction, and
instead entrusted the conduct of fresh elections to a neutral Receiver.
The restraint upon both sides was to operate till the disposal of the suit
or the declaration of the final result of the elections, whichever was
earlier. The appellants did not assail the order dated 13.04.2026. On
the contrary, they sought its limited modification, which was granted
by order dated 23.05.2026, and participated in the elections conducted
pursuant thereto. The respondents’ challenge to the said modification
has also since been withdrawn. The election was conducted by the
learned Receiver on 12.07.2026. On 18.07.2026, the Trial Court
opened the sealed envelope containing the result in the presence of the
parties and recorded the final result, whereby respondent no. 2/ Sh.
Ravi Prakash Kharakia was declared elected as President and
appellant no. 3/ Sh. Sanjay Garg was declared elected as Secretary.
16. In these circumstances, once the appellants have neither
challenged the appointment of the Receiver nor pressed their challenge
to the fresh election, and a new Managing Committee has come into
place through the very process set in motion by the order dated
13.04.2026, the requests that the old Managing Committee be allowed
Signature Not Verified
FAO 295/2026 Page 9 of 10
Digitally Signed
By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI
Signing Date:17.10.2026
17:16:50
back to manage the affairs of the Sabha , or that the learned Receiver
be permitted to continue to look after the affairs of the Sabha , cannot
be acceded to, as the same would amount to undoing the entire
election exercise.
17. In view of the above, the present appeal is dismissed to the
aforesaid extent. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any
opinion on the merits of the rival contentions of the parties, including
the validity of the elections held on 09.11.2025 and 12.07.2026, or the
inclusion of the 11 persons in the list of voters, which shall be
considered in the pending proceedings in accordance with law.
18. It is, however, clarified that the direction issued by this Court on
15.09.2026, requiring the respondents to maintain the details of the
three bank accounts held by the Sabha in the usual course of business,
shall continue to operate during the pendency of the suit or till fresh
elections of the Sabha are held, whichever is earlier.
19. The present appeal, along with the pending application, is
disposed of in the above terms.
(MANOJ KUMAR OHRI)
JUDGE
OCTOBER 15, 2026
nb
Signature Not Verified
FAO 295/2026 Page 10 of 10
Digitally Signed
By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI
Signing Date:17.10.2026
17:16:50