The High Court of Delhi disposed of the appeal by declining to interfere with the impugned order other than to delete the costs of Rs 10,000 imposed on the appellant.
The order on costs of Rs 10,000/- imposed on the appellant is deleted; the appeal is disposed of.
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.
$~2
SUBHASH CHANDER ..... Appellant Through : Mr Satya Prakash with Mr Rakesh K. Sharma
versus
PRAVEEN KUMAR AGGARWAL & ORS ..... Respondents
Through : Mr Nitin Nanda for R-1. Mr Raj Narain Saxena for R-3, 4 & 5.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
%
O R D E R 01.02.2016
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order, except to the extent of deleting the costs of Rs 10,000/- which has been imposed on the appellant.
The order with regard to the costs stands deleted. The appeal stands disposed of.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J
FEBRUARY 01, 2016 SR
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
Subhash Chander
Praveen Kumar Aggarwal & Ors
Badar Durrez Ahmed
Sanjeev Sachdeva
As recorded by the court registry
An appeal to a Division Bench against an order made by a single judge on the original side of the High Court.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
