Delhi High Court Issues Directions To District Courts On Numbering Of Applications, Flags Lack Of Basic Details In Orders
Nupur Thapliyal
6 Feb 2026 2:15 PM IST
The Delhi High Court has issued detailed practice directions to all the district courts in the national capital to ensure that every judicial order clearly reflects the numbers of applications decided, as well as the appearance of parties or their counsel.
A division bench comprising Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla noted that it was coming across several cases in which orders passed by the District Courts on interlocutory applications and other applications filed in pending proceedings do not reflect the application numbers.
As the bench was informed on the administrative side that all applications are duly numbered at the time of filing, the Court directed that all applications, at the time of filing, would be duly registered.
It added that the registration number of the application would be reflected in the cause list when the matter is placed before the concerned Court.
“Pleadings in the application(s) would be required to cite the concerned Application Number. Orders passed on the said applications should also reflect the Application Number(s) in which the orders are passed,” the Court said.
It requested all the District Courts in Delhi to ensure compliance with the directions passed, so that it facilitates reference to the applications when they are dealt with at the appellate or revisional stage.
“We also request the learned District Courts to ensure that judicial orders passed by them reflect the appearance of parties or learned counsel or, in case no one appears, notes to that effect,” the Court said.
“Let a copy of this order be marked to the Principal District & Sessions Judge for circulating among all the learned District Judges as well as to the learned Registrar General of this Court, so that compliance therewith can be ensured,” it added.
The Bench passed the order while allowing an appeal filed in a trademark and passing off dispute filed by Suresh Sharma against an order passed by the Commercial Court in a suit instituted by Krishan Lal Thukral.
The respondent-plaintiff alleged that Sharma was passing off his goods by using the “THUKRAL” formative marks and also sought delivery up, damages and rendition of accounts.
Vide the impugned order, the Commercial Court had continued the ex parte injunction passed in favour of the respondent- plaintiff.
Allowing the plea, the Court said that the Commercial Court, while affirming the injunction, had “not just failed to address the aspect of goodwill but has also failed to record any findings on the merits.”
Calling the impugned order “completely unreasoned”, the Bench ordered that the applications of the respondent under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 and of the appellant under Order XXXIX Rule 4 of the CPC be remitted to the Commercial Court for consideration afresh.
It also requested the Commercial Court that in case the applications have been accorded registration numbers by the Registry of the District Court, to reflect the registration numbers in the order which is passed.
Title: SURESH SHARMA v. KRISHAN LAL THUKRAL