Petitioner sought withdrawal of writ petition due to settlement, despite notice not having been issued for lack of process fee. Court dismissed petition as withdrawn.
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.
$~44
NITIN MARWAH ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sagar Aggarwal and Mr. Jitesh Talwani, Advs.
versus
M/S CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED ..... Respondent Through:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
O R D E R % 24.04.2019
Even though notice could not be issued for want of process fee,
learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the petition as according
to him, the matter has been settled.
The petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J
APRIL 24, 2019 /jg
NITIN MARWAH
M/S CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED
V. KAMESWAR RAO
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
