Satto Devi v. Neelu Khattar
Case brief
What is this about?
Thin listing order. Lists a hearing for 04.12.2017 due to counsel unavailability on previous calls. No substantive legal proposition.
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.
$~24
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- RFA 1019/2016
SATTO DEVI ..... Appellant Through: Mr.D.K.Mehta and Mr.Vivek Choudhry, Advocates.
versus
NEELU KHATTAR ..... Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL O R D E R % 29.11.2017
C.M.No.43462/2017 (Extension of time in settlement dated 28.03.2017) & C.M.No.43463/2017 (Exemption)
- In the first call, learned senior counsel for the appellant was not available though counsel for respondent was there.
- In the second call, the counsel for the respondent is not available and the arguing senior counsel on behalf of the appellant is also not available.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
SATTO DEVI
- respondent
NEELU KHATTAR
Coram
VINOD GOEL
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court