Mohd Azeem v. Mona Srinivasan & Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
The present order in contempt proceedings closed the petition based on statements from counsel that a regularisation application was rejected and demolition was scheduled.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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.
#10
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- CONT.CAS(C) 646/2015
MOHD AZEEM ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Alamgir and Mr. Mohammad Shadar, Advocates
versus
MONA SRINIVASAN & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Kapil Dutta, Proxy Counsel for Mr. Ajjay Aroraa, Standing Counsel with Mr. Saini, A.E., Central Zone for SDMC.
Mr. Peeyoosh Kalra, ASC (Civil), GNCTD with Ms. Sana Bbbar, Advocate for Delhi Police. Mr. Bahar U. Barqi, Advocate for owners.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
O R D E R % 11.11.2016
Learned counsel for respondent-SDMC states that regularisation application filed by the owners of the properties in question has been rejected on 7th November 2016. He further states that balance demolition action shall be undertaken on 24th November, 2016.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
MOHD AZEEM
- respondent
MONA SRINIVASAN
Coram
MANMOHAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court