Dismissed
N.D.M.C. v. R.S.Suri
Delhi HCW.P.(C)/6292/2004
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
Petitions challenging a 2003 judgment were disposed of as infructuous after the respondent withdrew the underlying appeals following the Supreme Court's judgment in State Trading Corporation of India Vs. NDMC in Civil Appeal No.2772/2009.
What did the court decide?
The writ petitions were disposed of as infructuous; no costs awarded.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
$~23 to 27
¶2
| * | IN THE HIGH COUR W.P.(C) 6290/2004 |
T OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI |
|---|---|---|
| N.D.M.C. | ..... Petitioner | |
| Versus | ||
| R.S. SURI | ..... Respondent | |
| W.P.(C) 6291/2004 | ||
| N.D.M.C. | ..... Petitioner | |
| Versus | ||
| R.S. SURI | ..... Respondent | |
| + | W.P.(C) 6292/2004 | |
| N.D.M.C. | ..... Petitioner | |
| Versus | ||
| R.S. SURI | ..... Respondent | |
| W.P.(C) 6308/2004 | ||
| N.D.M.C. | ..... Petitioner | |
| Versus | ||
| R.S. SURI | ..... Respondent | |
| W.P.(C) 6770/2004 | ||
| N.D.M.C. | ..... Petitioner | |
| Versus | ||
| R.S. SURI | ..... Respondent | |
| Counsel for petitioner: | Mr. Arjun Mitra and Mr. Abhishek Misra, Advs. for NDMC. |
|
| Counsel for respondent: | Mr. Rohit K. Aggarwal, Adv. |
¶3
CORAM:
¶4
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
¶5
O R D E R % 02.03.2016
¶6
- These petitions impugn the common judgment dated 1st August, 2003 of the Additional District Judge, Delhi allowing HTAs No.194/2002, 195/2002,
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
AI extract
Whether writ petitions challenging the judgment of 1st August 2003 become infructuous upon respondent's withdrawal in light of the Supreme Court judgment.
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- petitioner
N.D.M.C.
- respondent
R.S. SURI
Coram
AI extract
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court