A writ petition was dismissed in default as neither the petitioner nor his counsel appeared on the second call. The respondent submitted that demolition action had already been taken in accordance with law.
The writ petition was dismissed in default.
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.
$~15
NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Kapil Datta, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK O R D E R % 01.02.2016
Matter has been passed over once. Even on the second call, no one appears for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that demolition action has already been taken in accordance with law. Affidavit of Shri S. K. Singhal, Executive Engineer has been filed. Be that as it may,
this writ petition is dismissed in default.
A.K. PATHAK, J.
FEBRUARY 01, 2016/ dk
MOHD. UMAR
NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
A.K. PATHAK
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
