Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- S L BHAYANA
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 227
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Judgment
Mr. Abhinav Vashist, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Amit Chadha, Adv. for the petitioners. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Adv. for MCD. + * C.M. 2935/2011 Ailpwed, subject to all just exceptions. C.M. fM) No. 153/2011 & CM No.2934/2011 (stay) This petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 151 CPC for setting aside the impugned order dated 7.12.2010 whereby learned JSCC-cum-ASCj-cum-Guardian judge (West), Delhi has given directions to respondent No.2 to remove alleged encroachment to the extent of 6 mtrs. X 3 mtrs. from the municipal land. A report was submitted by the MCD on 15.4.2010 wherein MCD had stated that there is an encroachment to the extent of 6 mtrs. X 3 mtrs. on the municipal land. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they have moved a representation before the Hon'ble Lieutenant Governoer, Govt. of NCT, Delhi on 7.2.2011. iK' 4 Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that MCD has submitted its Status Report on 18.3.2009 regarding encroachment of the municipal land by the petitioners but they have not moved before any appropriate authority in this regard and moved a Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AMULYA representation before the Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor, Govt. of NCT, Delhi on 7.2.2011 which is a delaying tactics in order to obtain stay from this Court against the order passed by learned trial Court. I have gone through the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court. I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the learned trial Court. Dismissed. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial Court for compliance. _ S.L. BHAYANA, J. FEBRUARY 11, 2011 Kb
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.