$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1560/2006 DR. SUKHDEV SINGH GAMBHIR ..... Plaintiff Through: None. Versus AMRIT PAL SINGH GAMBHIR & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: D-1 in person. Mr. Salil Paul, Adv. for D-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW O R D E R % 26.02.2018 IA No.5332/2017 (of D-2 Inderjit Singh Gambhir u/S 152 CPC) 1. The counsel for the defendant No.2 has been heard. 2. The counsel for the defendant No.2 has drawn attention to para 27 of the judgment dated 17th April, 2017 where it has been recorded that “decree in terms of order dated 12th May, 2011 does not appear to have been drawn up till now” and contends that the final decree for partition had in fact been drawn up. Contending so, modification is sought of para 36 of the judgment insofar as granting liberty to the defendant No.1. 3. I have perused the judgment and am unable to find the final outcome of the judgment to be reasoned and dependent upon the factum of the decree having been drawn up or having not drawn up. 4. The counsel for the defendant No.2 also is unable to show, as to how the final outcome was dependent on the drawing up of the decree. CS(OS) 1560/2006 Page 1 of 2 5. No ground for entertaining the application under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is made out. 6. Dismissed. RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. FEBRUARY 26, 2018 „bs‟.. CS(OS) 1560/2006 Page 2 of 2