Dismissed
Nikhil Gupta and Anr. v. MCD and Anr.
Delhi HCW.P.(C)/9502/2017
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
null
What did the court decide?
Petitioner directed to submit a fresh representation within two weeks; respondents to pass a reasoned order within six weeks.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
$~2
¶2
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
¶3
- W.P.(C) 9502/2017
¶4
- NIKHIL GUPTA AND ANR. ..... Petitioner
¶5
Through Mr.Ramakant Sharma, Adv.
¶6
versus MCD AND ANR. ..... Respondent Through Mr.Mukesh Gupta, S.C. with Mr.Sanjay Baniwal, Adv NrDMC & Mr.R.K.Jain, A.E.
¶7
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
¶8
- O R D E R
¶9
- % 15.01.2019
¶10
- Vide the present petition, the petitioners have sought a direction to the respondents to de-seal his house bearing no.15-A, Sanjay Nagar, Gulabi Bagh, Delhi.
¶11
- After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that for the present, the petitioners will be satisfied if the respondents are directed to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 17.12.2011, which has remained un-responded for the last many years, by passing a reasoned and speaking order in a time bound manner.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
AI extract
Whether to direct the respondents to de-seal the petitioner's house.
Whether to direct the respondents to consider an old un-responded representation.
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- petitioner
Nikhil Gupta
- respondent
MCD
Coram
AI extract
Rekha Palli
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court