Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- TARA VITASTA GANJU
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 227
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 O. I r. 10
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. After some arguments, learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks is granted permission of the Court to withdraw the present Petitions.
Judgment
Cause title
& 26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 1394/2025 & CM APPL. 45852-45853/2025 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Nitesh Gupta, Advocate.
versus
RAHUL MASIH & ORS. .....Respondents Through:
+ CM(M) 1398/2025 & CM APPL. 46052-46053/2025 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Nitesh Gupta, Advocate.
versus
RAHUL MASIH & ORS. .....Respondent Through:
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
O R D E R
% 01.08.2025
The present Petitions have been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the order dated 27.02.2025 passed by the learned MACT, Saket Courts, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order”]. By the Impugned Order, the learned Tribunal has 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 04/08/2025 at 12:16:34 dismissed the Application under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as “CPC”] filed by the Petitioner who was Respondent No. 3/Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. for deletion of its name from the array of parties.
After some arguments, learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks is granted permission of the Court to withdraw the present Petitions.
The Petitions are accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. All pending Applications also stand closed.
The parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order. TARA VITASTA GANJU, J AUGUST 1, 2025/ ha
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.