Dismissed¶19

Mr. Karan Bhutani v. Star Sintered Products Ltd. & Anr.

Delhi HC21 Jan 2025CM(M)/121/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court; CM(M) 121/2025; Karan Bhutani v. Star Sintered Products Ltd & Anr.; Ravinder Dudeja, J.; order dated 21.01.2025; Article 227 Constitution of India; withdrawal with liberty to file fresh petition; review application dismissed 14.05.2024; original order 04.03.2022 unchallenged; CS No. 217/2021 District Judge; trial court free to proceed; CM APPL. 3566/2025 exemption allowed; CM APPL. 3565/2025 stay listed; petition dismissed as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the petition, with liberty as prayed to file a fresh petition impugning both the order dated 04.03.2022 and the review order dated 14.05.2024; clarification that the order shall not hinder the trial court from proceeding further. ¶19

Mr. Karan Bhutani Vs Star Sintered Products Ltd. & Anr. — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw CM(M) 121/2025 with liberty to file a fresh petition impugning both the original order dated 04.03.2022 and the review order dated 14.05.2024 in CS No. 217/2021. +1 more

¶18

Court's answer

The statement of counsel was taken on record and the petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for, i.e., liberty to file a fresh petition enabling challenge to both the order dated 04.03.2022 and the review order dated 14.05.2024.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

It was made clear that the order passed in the writ petition shall not prevent the trial court from proceeding further in the matter.

¶20

Key takeaways

The exemption application CM APPL. 3566/2025 was allowed, subject to all just exceptions, and stands disposed of.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Ravinder Dudeja, J.; order dated 21.01.2025) in CM(M) 121/2025, Mr. Karan Bhutani v. Star Sintered Products Ltd & Anr.: Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the District Judge's order dated 14.05.2024 dismissing the petitioner's review application in CS No. 217/2021. Counsel for the respondents noted that the original order dated 04.03.2022 had not been challenged, only the review order dated 14.05.2024 having been assailed. After part submissions, counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition so as to enable filing of a fresh petition impugning both orders. The petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for, and it was clarified that the order would not come in the way of the trial court proceeding further. The connected exemption application CM APPL. 3566/2025 was allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶1

$~63

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CM(M) 121/2025

¶4

MR. KARAN BHUTANI .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Satish Kumar and Mr. Rakesh Tiwari, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

STAR SINTERED PRODUCTS LTD & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shailen Bhatia, Mr. Amit Jain and Ms. Deeksha Gulati, Advs.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

¶9

O R D E R % 21.01.2025

¶10

CM APPL. 3566/2025 EXEMPTION

¶11

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

The application stands disposed of.

¶13

CM(M) 121/2025 & CM APPL. 3565/2025 STAY

¶14

This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the order dated 14.05.2024 passed by the learned District Judge in CS No. 217/2021.

¶15

Vide order dated 14.05.2024, the review application filed by the petitioner has been dismissed by the trial court.

¶16

Learned counsel for the respondents states that petitioner has not challenged the original order dated 04.03.2022 and has only challenged the order passed in review dated 14.05.2024.

¶17

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 24/01/2025 at 16:40:05

¶18

After part submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to file fresh petition in order to enable him to impugn both the aforesaid orders.

¶19

The statement made by the counsel is taken on record and the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.

¶20

It is made clear that the order passed in the writ petition shall not come in the way of the trial court in proceeding further in the matter.

¶21

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J

¶22

JANUARY 21, 2025/ib/fs

¶23

Mr. Karan Bhutani v. Star Sintered Products Ltd. & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Karan Bhutani v. Star Sintered Products Ltd. & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rekha Ajmani Vs Sunita Jain

Bhishma Tyagi Vs Jyotsna Singh

The General Manager, Northern Railways Vs Mrs Harleen Kaur

Smt Usha Vs Sh. Vikas and Others

M/S Skytech Construction Ltd. Vs Ashok Kumar Sharma

Geetanjali Kalra & Ors. Vs Rakesh Mohan Gulati & Anr.

Sandeep Chaudhary Vs Harpreet Singh

Shri Sanjib Kumar Behera Vs Sr Divisional Manager/Regional Manager & Anr.

Rekha Ajmani Vs Sunita Jain

Bhishma Tyagi Vs Jyotsna Singh

The General Manager, Northern Railways Vs Mrs Harleen Kaur

Nidhi Khurana Vs Inderjeet Kaur Bhatia & Ors.

M/S Surgi Aid Pharma Vs M/S Instromedix India Pvt. Ltd.

Walnut Pictures and Ors. Vs Rajyesh Patni