$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 962/2004 ARVINDRA KUMAR SINGH ..... Plaintiff Through: None. versus HARDAYAL KAUR & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. L.K. Rassi and Ms. Leela Suman, Advocates for R-3 and 4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA O R D E R % 21.05.2018 I.A. No. 7075/2018 (for modification of orders dated 27.7.2005 and 25.2.2006, filed by defendant nos. 3 and 4) and I.A. No. 7076/2018 (for condonation of delay in filing 17 days) 1. I.A. No. 7075/2018 is totally misconceived because by the order dated 14.1.2010 the suit filed for permanent and mandatory injunction was withdrawn as against the defendant nos. 3 and 4/applicants. I fail to understand what can be the clarification of an order by which a suit is withdrawn against defendant nos. 3 and 4. 2. I may note that originally there was an ex-parte decree passed CS(OS) 962/2004 page 1 of 2 on 15.2.2006 against all the defendants including defendant nos. 3 and 4 and so far as defendant nos. 3 and 4 are concerned the ex-parte decree was set aside vide order dated 3.4.2008. Subsequently on 14.1.2010 the suit is withdrawn against defendant nos. 3 and 4. 3. I, therefore, fail to understand that what can be the clarification which can be given of the order dated 14.1.2010 by which the suit is withdrawn and with the further fact that there cannot be clarification of an ex-parte decree passed which was in fact set aside by an order dated 3.4.2008 as against the applicants/defendant nos. 3 and 4. VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J MAY 21, 2018 AK CS(OS) 962/2004 page 2 of 2