Suit concerning a Delhi plot was withdrawn after the plaintiff handed over possession to defendant no. 4 in compliance with a consent decree dated 17.05.2024. The court permitted unconditional withdrawal, cautioned the plaintiff against frivolous suits, and declined to impose costs.
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. Yogender Saini, proxy counsel (through VC)
AMIT KUMAR & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr. Robin Ratnakar David, Mr. Nihar Baijal, Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
enters appearance on behalf of defendant no. 4.
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 23/12/2024 at 12:08:59
plaintiff states that since the plaintiff has already complied with the consent decree and does not wish to pursue the present suit, the plaintiff may be permitted to unconditionally withdraw this suit; and prays that this Court may not impose costs on him.
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
DECEMBER 18, 2024/ mt/ms
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
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 23/12/2024 at 12:08:59
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the plaintiff could be permitted to unconditionally withdraw the suit after complying with the consent decree dated 17.05.2024, and whether costs should be imposed.
Anuj Kumar
Amit Kumar & Ors.
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
As recorded by the court registry
A civil suit filed on the original side of a High Court exercising ordinary original civil jurisdiction.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
