Disposed¶17

Sushil Ansal v. Suresh Pratap

Delhi HC17 Jan 2025CM(M)/94/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 227 petition; DCDRC non-bailable warrants; cancellation of warrants application; no coercive steps; stay application; District Consumer Disputes Redressal; Directors; APIL; Ansal Hi-tech; CM(M) 84/2025; CM(M) 91/2025; CM(M) 94/2025; CM(M) 4228/2024; CM APPL. 2709/2025; CM APPL. 2957/2025; CM APPL. 2969/2025; Sushil Ansal; Ravinder Dudeja; Delhi High Court; 17.01.2025; dasti.

What did the court decide?

Exemption applications allowed subject to all just exceptions; DCDRC directed to consider the petitioner's cancellation application; interim restraint - no coercive steps till disposal of the stay application; copy of the order given dasti. ¶17

Sushil Ansal Vs Suresh Pratap — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether intervention by the Court was warranted in respect of the non-bailable warrants issued by the DCDRC against Directors, including the petitioner, who had already filed an application for their cancellation before the DCDRC. +1 more

¶10

Ratio / Principle

The exemption applications in CM(M) 84/2025 (CM APPL. 2709/2025), CM(M) 91/2025 (CM APPL. 2957/2025) and CM(M) 94/2025 (CM APPL. 2969/2025) were allowed, subject to all just exceptions, and the applications stood disposed of.

¶6

Key takeaways

Keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances and taking note of the order passed in CM(M) 4228/2024, it was directed that the cancellation application filed by the petitioner be considered, and in the meanwhile no coercive steps be taken against the respondent till the disposal of the stay application.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Ravinder Dudeja, J.), order dt. 17.01.2025 in three consolidated Article 227 petitions - CM(M) 84/2025, CM(M) 91/2025 and CM(M) 94/2025 - filed by Sushil Ansal impugning a DCDRC order dt. 03.01.2025 issuing non-bailable warrants against Directors (Rishabh Jain, Sanchit Jain, Komal Jain, Vikas Jain and Sushil Anshal). Counsel submitted that the petitioner had already filed an application for cancellation of warrants before the DCDRC, that under similar circumstances in CM(M) 4228/2024 the Court had directed the DCDRC to consider such an application within four weeks, and that the petitioner had resigned from APIL in 2022 and was never Director or shareholder of Ansal Hi-tech. Taking note of the CM(M) 4228/2024 order, the Court directed that the petitioner's cancellation application be considered and that, in the meanwhile, no coercive steps be taken till the disposal of the stay application. The petitions stand disposed of; exemption applications allowed; copy given dasti.

¶1

$~88, 95 and 98

¶2

*	IN THE HIGH	COURT O	F DELHI AT	NEW DELHI
+	CM(M) 84/2025
	SUSHIL ANSAL			.....Petitioner
		Through:	Ms. Malak Bha	tt, Ms. Neena Nagpal,
			Ms. Samridhi Chopra, Adv.	and Mr. Shreyansh
		versus
	AMIT KUMAR	Through:		.....Respondent
95
+	CM(M) 91/2025
	SUSHIL ANSAL			.....Petitioner
		Through:	Ms. Malak Bha	tt, Ms. Neena Nagpal,
			Ms. Samridhi	and Mr. Shreyansh
			Chopra, Adv.
		versus
	SURENDRA PRA	TAP SING Through:	H AND ANR.	.....Respondents
98
+	CM(M) 94/2025
	SUSHIL ANSAL			.....Petitioner
		Through:	Ms. Malak Bha	tt, Ms. Neena Nagpal,
		versus	Ms. Samridhi Chopra, Adv.	and Mr. Shreyansh
	SURESH PRATA	P Through:		.....Respondent

¶3

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 15:08:01

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

¶5

O R D E R % 17.01.2025 CM APPL. 2709/2025 EXEMPTION in CM(M) 84/2025 CM APPL. 2957/2025EXEMPTION in CM(M) 91/2025 CM APPL. 2969/2025EXEMPTION in CM(M) 94/2025

¶6

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶7

The application stands disposed of.

¶8

CM(M) 84/2025 & CM APPL. 2708/2025 STAY CM(M) 91/2025 & CM APPL. 2956/2025 STAY CM(M) 94/2025& CM APPL. 3032/2025 STAY

¶9

These petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugn the order dated 03.01.2025 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal [DCDRC].

¶10

It is submitted by the learned counsel that vide order dated 03.01.2025 the DCDRC has issued non -bailable warrants against Directors, Rishabh Jain, Sanchit Jain, Komal Jain, Vikas Jain and Sushil Anshal.

¶11

It is submitted that petitioner had already filed an application for cancellation of warrants before DCDRC and under similar circumstances in CM(M) 4228/2024, this Court directed the DCDRC to consider the application for cancellation of warrants within next four weeks.

¶12

Learned counsel submits that petitioner is no more the Director in the company inasmuch as he resigned from APIL in 2022 and was never Director or shareholder of Ansal Hi-tech.

¶13

Keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances, and taking note of

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

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 15:08:01

¶16

the order passed in CM(M) 4228/2024, it is directed that cancellation application filed by the petitioner be considered and in the meanwhile no coercive steps be taken against the respondent till the disposal of the stay application.

¶17

The petitions stand disposed of with the aforesaid observations.

¶18

A copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

¶19

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J

¶20

JANUARY 17, 2025/ib/n

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

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 15:08:01

Sushil Ansal v. Suresh Pratap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil Ansal v. Suresh Pratap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Fakhruddin Memorial Cghs Ltd. Vs M/S Jia Lal Kishori Lal Pvt. Ltd.

Sanjeev Kumar Wadhwa & Anr. Vs M/S Cosmos Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Laxmi Eye Care LLP & Ors. Vs M/S Optiplaza

M/S Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd. Vs Mohan Singh Parmar & Anr.

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

Fakhruddin Memorial Cghs Ltd. Vs M/S Jia Lal Kishori Lal Pvt. Ltd.

Sanjeev Kumar Wadhwa & Anr. Vs M/S Cosmos Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Laxmi Eye Care LLP & Ors. Vs M/S Optiplaza

Sushil Ansal Vs Surendra Pratap Singh and Anr.

Kartar Singh Deceased through His Lrs Naresh Kumar Vs Sajjan Singh & Ors.

Sushil Ansal Vs Amit Kumar