Disposed

Sushma Tanwar v. Ms Mahima Madan & Anr.

Delhi HC21 Nov 2024CONT.CAS(C)/1474/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition alleging non-decision of a representation within the time fixed by an earlier High Court writ order. Respondents undertook on instructions to decide it within six weeks; petitioner did not press and petition was disposed of with liberty to revive if the deadline is missed.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to revive contempt proceedings if representation not decided within six weeks.

Sushma Tanwar Vs Ms Mahima Madan & Anr. — Contempt of Court | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~111

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CONT.CAS(C) 1474/2024 & CM APPL. 67758-67759/2024 SUSHMA TANWAR .....Petitioner

¶4

Through: Mr. Madhav Khurana and Mr. Teeksh Singhal, Advocates

¶5

versus

¶6

MS MAHIMA MADAN & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Prakhyat Gatgasya, Advocate for Mr. Divyam Nandrajog, Panel Counsel, GNCTD for R-1 & R-2

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 21.11.2024

¶10

Application has been moved from the side of petitioner seeking early hearing.

¶11

However, issue involved in the present contempt petition is very short one.

¶12

According to petitioner, despite there being specific direction given by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. (C) 9595/2024 vide order dated 16.07.2024, the representation, which was required to be decided within six weeks, has yet not been decided.

¶13

Mr. Prakhyat, learned counsel for respondents submits that status report has already been filed. It, however, seems that same is still not on record.

¶14

When asked, it was submitted, on instructions, that the concerned

¶15

CONT.CAS(C) 1474/2024 1

¶16

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 25/11/2024 at 14:19:37

¶17

competent authority shall decide the representation in question within six weeks from today. It is also submitted that it could not be decided within the given time because of the complex nature of the matter.

¶18

According to learned counsel for petitioner, whereas, there is no complexity involved.

¶19

Be that as it may, in view of aforesaid statement made on instructions, by learned counsel for respondents, the petitioner does not press for his application seeking early hearing as well as with respect to the main contempt petition. He, however, submits that in case representation is not decided within the time undertaken today, he may be permitted to revive the proceedings.

¶20

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of as not pressed. Liberty, as prayed, is granted.

¶21

MANOJ JAIN, J

¶22

NOVEMBER 21, 2024/ dr

¶23

CONT.CAS(C) 1474/2024 2

¶24

Sushma Tanwar v. Ms Mahima Madan & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushma Tanwar v. Ms Mahima Madan & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shfiqur Rahman Kidwai Association and Another Jamia Millia Islamia Vs Prof Nazim Husain Al- Jafri

Dilip Kumar Vs Sh. Ajay Kumar Bhalla & Ors.

Rajnesh Vs Gyanesh Bharti IAS & Ors.

Vipin Kumar Gupta Vs Shri Krishna Mohan Uppu & Anr.

Jeet Kumar Sohra Vs Office of the Principal District and Sessions Judge Head Quarters

Siddhartha Mukherjee Vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and Ors.

Anil Dutt Sharma Vs Rahul Mehra & Ors.

Yogita Vs Krishan (Vikash)

M/S Tdi Infrastructure Ltd. Vs Vikram Barwal & Ors.

M/S Cannes Property Management Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Vikram Barwal and Ors.

Shfiqur Rahman Kidwai Association and Another Jamia Millia Islamia Vs Prof Nazim Husain Al- Jafri

Shiv Kumar Vs Subhasish Panda

Feku Prasad & Ors. Vs Vice Chairman, Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Dor Welfare Foundation Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.