Azad Market Rwa (Regd) v. Smt. Mamta Yadav

Delhi HC7 Aug 2025CONT.CAS(C)/1094/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Azad Market RWA (Regd.); MCD; Smt. Mamta Yadav; contempt costs recovery; cost of Rs. 10,00,000/- imposed vide judgment dated 07.08.2025; General Secretary Anil Lodhi; SDM Sadar Bazar report; premises locked; attachment of property of General Secretary; recovery proceedings; Delhi High Court; Joint Registrar (Judicial) Bhawani Sharma; CONT.CAS(C) 1094/2025; W.P.(C) 15795/2023; W.P.(C) 13856/2024; renotify 28.07.2026.

What did the court decide?

Interim order: SDM's counsel permitted approx. 8 weeks more to trace the other properties of the petitioner RWA and granted liberty to examine attachment of property belonging to General Secretary Mr. Anil Lodhi (excluding his personal properties) to satisfy the imposed cost of Rs. 10,00,000/-; the needful to be done before the next date of hearing; matter renotified for 28.07.2026. ¶¶29

Azad Market Rwa (Regd) Vs Smt. Mamta Yadav — Contempt of Court | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶29

Issue for consideration

Status of recovery of the Rs. 10,00,000/- cost imposed on petitioner Azad Market RWA (Regd.) vide judgment dated 07.08.2025, in light of the SDM (Sadar Bazar) report that recovery at the given address failed (premises locked; General Secretary Sh. Anil Lodhi shifted and his present address undisclosed). +1 more

¶¶27

Ratio / Principle

The Court allowed the prayer of counsel for SDM for additional time (8 weeks or so) to trace the other properties of petitioner Azad Market RWA (Regd.) so as to satisfy the imposed cost amount.

¶¶29

Key takeaways

The Court allowed the further prayer seeking liberty to look into the aspect of attaching the property belonging to General Secretary Mr. Anil Lodhi, and not his personal properties, so as to satisfy the cost.ratio¶¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi, Order dated 24.04.2026 (Joint Registrar (Judicial) Bhawani Sharma) in CONT.CAS(C) 1094/2025, W.P.(C) 15795/2023 and W.P.(C) 13856/2024 — Azad Market RWA (Regd.) v. Smt. Mamta Yadav / MCD and others. Pursuant to the Court's judgment dated 07.08.2025 imposing a cost of Rs. 10,00,000/- on the petitioner RWA, to be deposited through its General Secretary Mr. Anil Lodhi within six weeks, the report of SDM, Sadar Bazar disclosed that recovery at the given address could not be effected: the premises was found locked, Mr. Lodhi had shifted elsewhere, and on telephone he declined to disclose his present address, stating he would appear before the Court on 26.02.2026. On the submission of counsel for SDM, the Court allowed (i) further time of 8 weeks or so to trace the other properties of the RWA to satisfy the cost, and (ii) liberty to look into attaching property belonging to General Secretary Mr. Anil Lodhi, and not his personal properties, so as to satisfy the cost. The needful was to be done before the next date of hearing; renotified for 28.07.2026.

¶1

$~5 to 7

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CONT.CAS(C) 1094/2025

¶4

AZAD MARKET RWA (REGD)

¶5

.....Petitioner Through: Mr. B.L. Gupta, Adv.

versus

SMT. MAMTA YADAV

.....Respondent

Through: None.

¶10

- W.P.(C) 15795/2023

¶11

AZAD MARKET RWA (REGD) THROUGUH ITS

¶12

GENERAL SECRETARY

¶13

.....Petitioner

¶14

Through: Mr. B.L. Gupta, Adv. versus

¶15

MCD AND OTHERS

¶16

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Tushar Sannu, Fajallu and Ms. Rimpy Rohilla, Advs.

¶17

W.P.(C) 13856/2024

¶18

AZAD MARKET RWA (REGD)

¶19

.....Petitioner Through: Mr. B.L. Gupta, Adv. versus

¶20

THE MCD AND ORS

¶21

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Tushar Sannu, Fajallu and Ms. Rimpy Rohilla, Advs.

¶22

CORAM: JOINT REGISTRAR (JUDICIAL) BHAWANI SHARMA

¶23

O R D E R % 24.04.2026

¶24

File is placed before this Court Vide judgment dated 07.08.2025 for depositing the cost of Rs. 10,00,000/- by the petitioner i.e. Azad Market RWA (Regd.), through its General Secretary Mr. Anil Lodhi within six weeks from 07.08.2025.

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

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 29/04/2026 at 12:33:29

¶27

Matter is pending for filing the report of SDM concerned to apprise the status of recovery of the cost amount from the petitioner within two weeks from today as directed in judgment dated 07.08.2025 of the Hon‟ble Court.

¶28

As per office note, report of SDM, Sadar Bazar has been filed. The same is perused and as per the report, recovery proceedings could be executed at the given address as the premises was found locked and Sh. Anil Lodhi has shifted from the said premises to somewhere else. It is further stated that telephonic conversation was made with Sh. Anil Lodhi on the said number. However, he did not disclose his present address and stated that he shall appear before this Hon'ble Court on 26.02.2026.

¶29

At this stage, counsel for SDM submits that he be given more time to trace the other properties of petitioner i.e. Azad Market RWA (Regd.) so as to satisfy the cost amount as imposed for which time of 8 weeks or so is prayed to be given. He also seeks liberty to look into the aspect of attaching the property belonging to General Secretary Mr. Anil Lodhi and not his personal properties so as to satisfy the cost. Heard. Allowed.

¶30

Let the needful be done before the next date of hearing.

¶31

Renotify on 28.07.2026.

¶32

BHAWANI SHARMA JOINT REGISTRAR (JUDICIAL)

¶33

APRIL 24, 2026/yo

¶34

This is a digitally signed order.

¶35

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 29/04/2026 at 12:33:29

Azad Market Rwa (Regd) v. Smt. Mamta Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Azad Market Rwa (Regd) v. Smt. Mamta Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sh. Dumesh Kumar Vs Sh. Vijay Kumar

Sh Shashi Kant Singh Vs Smt Ranjana Singh

Nauman Ahmad Khan Vs Managing Committee Rabea Girls Public School Qasimjan Street Ballimaran Delhi 110006 through Its Pr

Nauman Ahmad Khan Vs Managing Committee Rabea Girls Public School Qasimjan Street Ballimaran Delhi 110006 through Its Pr

Rajni Vs Shri Ashwani Kumar, Commissioner, MCD and Anr.

Minatirani Mohapatra, Vs Mahesh Prasad Mishra & Ors.

Aniljit Singh Vs N Saravana Kumar & Anr.

Sunder Lal Gupta Vs Shri Karan Singh & Anr.

Shanti Brothers Jewellers Vs Madonna'S & Anr.

Parminder Kaur Vs the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Yashvardhan Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Jai Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Suresh K Vs Election Commission of India & Anr.

Tarsem Chand Vs Veena Arora