Dismissed¶20

M/S Aastha Gill Media Technologies LLP v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC11 Mar 2026CONT.CAS(C)/380/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court, CONT.CAS(C) 380/2026, M/s Aastha Gill Media Technologies LLP v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors., Sachin Datta J, order dated 11.03.2026. Contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience of the 17.02.2026 order in W.P.(C) 2211/2026 (no demolition contrary to law, bye-laws, extant rules). MCD counsel reported property inspected and personal hearing scheduled; statement recorded; petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach again. No costs or monetary quantum; no statutes or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn; liberty reserved to the petitioner to agitate the remaining prayers/any outstanding grievance upon culmination of the inspection and personal-hearing exercise; statement of respondent nos.1 and 2 taken on record. ¶20

M/S Aastha Gill Media Technologies LLP Vs Municipal… — Contempt of Court | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent nos.1 and 2 committed wilful disobedience of the direction in the order dated 17.02.2026 in W.P.(C) 2211/2026 that they ensure no demolition takes place contrary to law, bye-laws and the extant rules.

¶10

Court's answer

Learned counsel for respondent nos.1 and 2, appearing on advance notice, submitted that the property had already been inspected and a personal hearing had been scheduled, and that after affording such personal hearing appropriate action as warranted under the extant rules and regulations would be taken by the said respondents; the Court took this statement on record.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

In view of the statement taken on record, the petitioner did not press the remaining prayers at this stage, seeking liberty to agitate the same in the event of any outstanding grievance upon culmination of the inspection and personal-hearing exercise.

¶19

Key takeaways

The petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, with the aforesaid liberty, and taking on record the statement made on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt of court (CONT.CAS(C)) — Petition by M/s Aastha Gill Media Technologies LLP alleging wilful disobedience of the direction in the order dated 17.02.2026 in W.P.(C) 2211/2026 that respondent nos.1 and 2 (MCD) ensure no demolition takes place contrary to law, bye-laws and the extant rules. Counsel for MCD, appearing on advance notice, stated that the property had been inspected and a personal hearing scheduled, with appropriate action under the extant rules and regulations to follow; the statement was taken on record. The petitioner did not press remaining prayers; the petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to agitate any outstanding grievance upon culmination of the exercise. Coram: Sachin Datta, J (Delhi High Court, 11.03.2026).

¶1

$~93

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CONT.CAS(C) 380/2026

¶4

M/S AASTHA GILL MEDIA TECHNOLOGIES LLP.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Yash Anand and Ms. Ayushi Mishra, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS......Respondents Through: Ms. Akanksha Gupta and Mr. Yash Garg, Advs. for R-1/MCD.

¶7

Mr. Akhileshwar Jha, SPC, Mr. Kushagra Sachdeva, GP, Ms. Asmita Mishra, Ms. Shreya Jha, Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma and Mr. Varun Varma, Advs. for R-3/UOI.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA O R D E R % 11.03.2026

¶10

The present petition alleges wilful disobedience of the directions contained in the order dated 17.02.2026, passed in W.P.(C) 2211/2026 which inter - alia records as under:

¶11

“ 10. The respondent nos.1 and 2 shall ensure that no demolition takes place contrary to law, bye-laws and the extent rules.

¶12

It is the case of the petitioner that unauthorized demolition / disruption is being caused in contravention of applicable municipal guidelines.

¶13

Learned counsel for the respondent nos.1 and 2, who appears on advance notice, submits that the property has already been inspected and a personal hearing has been scheduled.

¶14

It is submitted that after affording a personal hearing to the petitioner, appropriate action, as may be warranted under the extant rules and

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

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 16/03/2026 at 17:13:18

¶17

regulations, shall be taken by the said respondents.

¶18

The said statement is taken on record.

¶19

In view thereof, the petitioner does not press the remaining prayers at this stage, while seeking liberty to agitate the same in the event of any outstanding grievance upon culmination of the aforesaid exercise.

¶20

The petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, with the aforesaid liberty, and taking on record the aforesaid statement on behalf of the respondent nos.1 and 2.

¶21

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶22

MARCH 11, 2026/ cl

¶23

This is a digitally signed order.

¶24

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 16/03/2026 at 17:13:18

M/S Aastha Gill Media Technologies LLP v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Aastha Gill Media Technologies LLP v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

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

Vibha Sharma Vs Keshav Chandra and Ors.

Dragon Boat India and Traditional Sports Federation (Dbi and Tsf), through by Its Secretary General Vs Union of India (Uoi) and Ors.

Renuka Sarkar Vs Ajay Kumar Bhalla & Ors.

Manisha Vs Mahesh Kumar

Dsfdc Employees Welfare Association Vs Prashant Goyal

Smt. Meenakshi Vs Sh. Dharmendra & Ors.

Krishna Mohan Shukla Vs Sh Anurag Jain

Shane Alam and Anr. Vs Pramila Kumari and Anr.

Dragon Boat India and Traditional Sports Federation (Dbi and Tsf), through by Its Secretary General Vs Union of India (Uoi) and Ors.

Ashish Vs District Magistrate (North-West) & Ors.

Manisha Vs Mahesh Kumar

Ex Sgt Pravat Ravi Vs Dr Niten Chandra IAS and Ors.

Lt Col R K Purohit Vs Ms Rachna Shah & Anr.

Ex Sgt Binoy Td Vs Dr Niten Chandra IAS and Ors. & Ors.