The court dismissed a review petition against an order dated 03.12.2024, holding that the contentions were already dealt with and no error was apparent on the face of the record. The cases cited by the petitioner were distinguished as inapplicable.
null
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.
$~68
VATEENA BEGUM .....Petitioner
Through: Md. Azam Ansari & Mr. Kamran Khan, Advs.
versus
NAZMA MALIK .....Respondent Through: Mr. Shekhar Prit Jha, Adv.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA
O R D E R
% 05.12.2024 CM APPL. 71272/2024 (FOR REFERENCE OF MATTER TO CONCERNED BAR COUNCIL)
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present application stating that he will take up the matter directly with the Bar Council.
In view of the statement made by learned counsel is taken on record and in view thereof, the application is dismissed as withdrawn.
REVIEW PET. 455/2024 (REVIEW OF ORDER DT. 03.12.2024)
i) Shrikant Kaushik vs. DDA & Anr. LPA 389/2012;
ii) Ashok Kumar Gupta vs. DMRC and Anr., LPA No. 469/2012;
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 07/12/2024 at 11:37:14
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.
DECEMBER 5, 2024 sk
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 07/12/2024 at 11:37:14
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned counsel's submissions were omitted in the impugned order, justifying a review?
Whether there is an error apparent on the face of the record warranting the exercise of review jurisdiction?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Shrikant KaushikDistinguished¶15
Shrikant Kaushik vs. DDA & Anr. LPA 389/2012
Ashok Kumar GuptaDistinguished¶16
Ashok Kumar Gupta vs. DMRC and Anr., LPA No. 469/2012
Rattan Lal AroraDistinguished¶18
Rattan Lal Arora vs. Delhi Vidhyut Board & Ors., LPA 172/2015
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vateena Begum
Nazma Malik
Ravinder Dudeja
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 227 of the Constitution invoking the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate civil courts.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
