The petition was dismissed for non-prosecution without the petitioner appearing in court. No substantive legal issues were addressed as the case lacked prosecution.
Petition dismissed for 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.
$~32
SH. ONKAR MITTAL ..... Petitioner Through: None.
versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Arun Birbal, Advocate with Mr. Ajay Birbal, Advocate for DDA. Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Advocate with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for LAC/L&B.
CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
O R D E R % 09.01.2019
S.MURALIDHAR, J
SANJEEV NARULA, J
JANUARY 09, 2019 ss
Sh. Onkar Mittal
Delhi Development Authority
S. Muralidhar
Sanjeev Narula
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
