Writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution due to lack of instructions from the petitioner.
Writ petition and CM No.43263/2017 dismissed due to non-prosecution.
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.
$~1
RAM BAI AHIRWAR AND ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Sanjay Baniwal, Adv. for Mr.Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate.
versus
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.
..... Respondents Through: Ms.Jyoti Taneja, Advocate for R-2 & R-3/GNCTD.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
Counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no instruction in the matter. Accordingly, the writ petition and CM No.43263/2017 are dismissed for non prosecution.
G. S. SISTANI, J
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
MARCH 23, 2018 afa
Ram Bai Ahirwar and Anr.
South Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.
G. S. Sistani
Sangita Dhingra Sehgal
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
