In a contempt application regarding non-delivery of an auctioned plot, the court accepted the opposite party's submission that possession was delivered to the creditor bank and consigned the matter.
Notices issued to the opposite party are discharged and the application is consigned.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 19
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1209 of 2018
Applicant :- Kahkasha Bano Opposite Party :- Shri Subhash L.Y District Magistrate And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Tiwari
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.
By order dated 8.3.2018, the opposite party was required to appear before this Court and explain the circumstances in which the possession of the plot auctioned, has not been delivered to the applicant.
Sri Neeraj Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General and Sri Neeraj Upadhyay, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party states that the possession of the auctioned plot has been duly delivered to the creditor Bank. Thus, full compliance has been made.
Counsel for the applicant does not dispute this fact.
In view thereof, nothing further survives in the instant matter. Notices issued to the opposite party are hereby discharged.
The application is consigned.
(Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.)
Order Date :- 29.3.2018
skv
Kahkasha Bano
Shri Subhash L.Y District Magistrate
Manoj Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
