The Court declined to initiate contempt proceedings to enforce a prior order dated 05.09.2018 after a petitioner argued remedial exhaustion, holding the petitioner was not remediless and retaining liberty to seek appropriate remedies under law.
Contempt proceedings not taken; parties at liberty to take necessary remedy.
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.
$~3
ADITYA SARDA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vikas Mehta and Mr. Ankit Vashisht, Advs.
Versus
NEETA SARDA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ashok Kumar Jain, Mr. Gaurav Kejariwal and Mr. Ankit Kohli, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
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 13/08/2024 at 12:29:59
the contempt proceedings pursuant to the order dated 05.09.2018. The parties are, however, at liberty to take necessary remedy, in accordance with law.
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J
AUGUST 6, 2024 p’ma
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 13/08/2024 at 12:29:59
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Court should initiate contempt proceedings to ensure compliance with the order dated 05.09.2018.
Aditya Sarda
Neeta Sarda
Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
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
