A one-line dismissal in default: the petitioner was absent when the matter was called, counsel for respondent No. 12 reported a compromise with private respondents Nos. 1 to 9, and the Court dismissed the petition and pending applications for default of the petitioner. The order decides nothing of general application.
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.
$~19
VIJAY GAUR .....Petitioner
Through: None.
Versus
MR. TAHA FAHIM & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Manish Kumar Srivastava & Mr.Moksh Arora, Advocates for respondent No.12
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
%
O R D E R 17.12.2024
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J
DECEMBER 17, 2024
r
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/12/2024 at 12:46:59
Vijay Gaur
Mr. Taha Fahim
Respondents Nos. 1 to 9
Respondent No. 12
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
