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.
$~13
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
M/S BAKEMANS INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Joby P.Varghese, Advocate with Mr.Ankit Prakash, Advocate
versus
ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY OF INDIA LIMITED & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R % 15.01.2016
After some arguments counsel seeks leave to withdraw the writ petition because the mother order concerning the assignment which has been followed in the subsequent order has already been challenged in a writ petition which is pending and in which writ petition the writ petitioner of the instant petition is a respondent. Being a respondent in the said writ petition, the writ petitioner has two remedies. Firstly to support the writ petitioner of said writ petition. Alternatively to seek transposition as a writ petitioner in his own right. So obseving the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. W.P.(C) 311/2016 page 1 of 2
page 1 of 2
CM No.1272/2016
Dismissed as infructuous.
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
JANUARY 15, 2016 mamta
W.P.(C) 311/2016
page 2 of 2
M/S BAKEMANS INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.
ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY OF INDIA LIMITED & ORS.
PRADHEP NANDRAJOG
MUKTA GUPTA
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
