Petitioner sought leave to withdraw the writ petition with an undertaking to seek remedies from the appropriate forum; the court disposed of the petition as withdrawn.
Petition disposed of as withdrawn; miscellaneous application disposed of as infructuous.
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.
$~53
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DEVENDER KUMAR BHARGAVA ..... Petitioner Through :Mr. Medhanshu Tripathi and Mr. Manoj Sehgal, Advs.
versus
AKHIL BHARTIYA BHARGAVA SABHA (REGD) AND ORS ..... Respondents Through :Mr. Sanjay Bhargava, Adv. for respondent no. 1
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK
O R D E R % 21.04.2017
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that remedies, as advised
under the law against the impugned order passed by the private Tribunal, would be taken by the petitioner before the appropriate forum. He seeks
leave to withdraw this petition. Petition is disposed of as withdrawn. Miscellaneous application is disposed of as infructuous.
A.K. PATHAK, J.
APRIL 21, 2017 rb
DEVENDER KUMAR BHARGAVA
AKHIL BHARTIYA BHARGAVA SABHA
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
