On delay in compliance of a prior order, the court held that the delay is condoned. Consequently, the contempt petition, not having been pressed by the appellant/petitioner, was disposed off without any adverse consequences or further proceedings.
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.
$~23
Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose and Mr. Rishabh Jetley, Advocates.
versus
DEEPAK JAIN & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Rahul Shukla, Advocate.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
O R D E R
% 11.03.2019
This petition seeks contempt proceedings against the respondents. However, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that there was some delay in compliance of the order. He submits that the said delay is condoned by order dated 16.10.2018 in CM APP. 43652/2018 in W.P. (C) 7917/2011.
The petition is not pressed. It is disposed-off accordingly.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J
MARCH 11, 2019
RW
SUNDER LAL JAIN HOSPITAL KARAMCHARI UNION (REGD)
DEEPAK JAIN & ORS
NAJMI WAZIRI
As recorded by the court registry
Proceedings for wilful disobedience of a court order under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
