Sunita Khanna v. Madhup Vyas
Case brief
What is this about?
Single judge order accepting a status report and closing the present contempt petition. A separate application for impleadment was dismissed for not having been pressed.
What did the court decide?
Contempt petition closed; application for impleadment dismissed as not pressed.
What the court decided
$~9
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- CONT.CAS(C) 33/2018, CM No. 14073/2018 SUNITA KHANNA
..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Tarun Sharma, Adv. for the petitioner Mr.Pramod Kr.Sharma, Adv. for applicant in CM No. 14073/2018 versus MADHUP VYAS ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Puja Kalra, Adv. for NDMC CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO O R D E R % 11.04.2018 CONT.CAS(C) 33/2018
Ms.Puja Kalra, Adv. has filed a status report in the Court. The same
is taken on record. Para 3 of the status report reads as under:
- “3. It is submitted that the present affidavit is being filed by the deponent strictly in terms of the directions dated 14-32018 and the same was based on the site inspection carried out by the PHI. City S.P.Zone dated on 21.3.2018. It is reported that the premises in question that is property No. 8387, Roshnara Road, Delhi, no health trade activity was found running in the said premises. It is pertinent to mention that the strict vigil and check is being kept over the said premises and in case any violation of law on any account is
noticed, the appropriate action under law and the provisions of DMC Act shall be initiated. It is reiterated that no Dhaba is being run. However, photographs were taken by the Department on 21.03.2018 are annexed R-1 collectively. It is deposed accordingly”.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
SUNITA KHANNA
- respondent
MADHUP VYAS
Coram
V. KAMESWAR RAO
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court