The High Court of Delhi dismissed a review petition and application for condonation of delay due to the petitioner's non-appearance and non-prosecution of the matter.
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.
$~18.
RUDERASREY SHARMA ..... Petitioner/Review Petitioner Through : None.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondent Through : Mr.Jagjit Singh, Standing counsel Mr.Preet Singh, Adv. for Union of India.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
%
O R D E R 21.04.2016
REVIEW PET. 86/2016 &CM APPL. 5646/2016 (DELAY)
None is present on behalf of the review petitioner despite the matter being passed over once and called a second time. None was present on behalf of the review petitioner even on the last date of hearing. It seems that the review petitioner is not interested in pursuing the present review petition and the application seeking condonation of 04 days’ delay in filing the review petition.
Accordingly, the review petition and CM Appl.5646/2016 stands dismissed for non-appearance and non-prosecution.
G.S.SISTANI, J
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
APRIL 21, 2016 msr /
Ruderashrey Sharma
Union of India
G.S. Sistani
Sangita Dhingra Sehgal
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
