NyayAI Legal Knowledge Graph — Public Judgment & Act Pages (validation build, unlisted)

LPA/67/2016 of ASHWINI SHOURIE Vs DIRECTORATE OF ESTATES & ANR

Court
Delhi High Court
Decision date
2017-09-07
Bench
BAIJI M S, NAUROJI NAGAR, NEW DELHI, SAFDARJUNG ENCLAVE, SAROJINI NAGAR

Parties

Cited by (1)

Counts citations resolved within this build's own ingested judgment corpus. The true corpus-wide count will be higher until more of the corpus is ingested.

Cites (0 resolved of 1 detected)

1 case citation detected in this judgment's own text, but none resolved to a judgment page in this build yet.

Statutes cited (1)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Conclusion

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ LPA 67/2016, CM APPL.3614 & 41529/2016

ASHWINI SHOURIE

..... Appellant

Through: Mr. Siddharth with Mr. Inder Chand, Advocates.

versus

DIRECTORATE OF ESTATES & ANR

..... Respondents

Through: Mr. Rajesh Gogna with Ms. Vipra Bhardwaj, Advocates for Resp-1&2.

Mr. Jaimon Andrews, Advocate

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

O R R07.09.2017

After some hearing, learned counsel for the appellant upon instructions, sought liberty to withdraw the appeal, but, with liberty to seek appropriate relief of declaration by the Civil Court. Liberty granted provided that the concerned parties including the Union of India Directorate of Estate is impleaded as party/respondent, subject to the provisions of law and the suit being filed within four weeks.

The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn in the above terms.

CM APPL.41529/2016

The Court notices that the appellant has relied upon partnership deed dated 02.02.1999 which is part of Annexure (collectively). LPA 67/2016 Page 1 of 2

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant Mr. Ashwini Shourie contended that this document is unknown to him and that he did not ever file it.

The Court notices that Mr. Shourie had affirmed the affidavit dated 27.01.2016 affirming to the contents of the appeal, therefore, prima facie he was aware of Annexure A-7 (collectively). In the circumstances, issue show cause notice to the appellant as to why the proceedings under Section 340 read with Section 191 Cr.P.C., 1963 should not be initiated for further prosecution.

Likewise, similar notice shall be issued to Mr. M.C. Dominic, F-167, Nauroji Nagar, New Delhi,Mr. Baiji M.S., A2/11, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi, and Mr. Manuvel Mezhukanal, K-212, Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi-110023, returnable on 16[th] October, 2017.

The said individuals shall be present in the Court on the next date of hearing. Interim order stands vacated.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

SEPTEMBER 07, 2017 /vikas/

SUNIL GAUR, J