Rajeev Saumitra v. Neetu Singh

$~7,9& 10 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CONT.CAS(C) 872/2015 RAJEEV SAUMITRA Through:

Petitioner Mr. P.V.Kapur, Senior Advocate with Mr. Murari Tiwari, Advocate, Mr.

Rahul Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Devesh Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Vimal Nagrath, Advocate, Mr. Sidharth Kapur, Advocate, Ms. Kaveri Gupta, Advocate and Mr. Purav Mehta, Advocate.

versus NEETU SINGH Respondent Ms. Rajeshwari, Advocate.

Through:

+ CONT.CAS(C) 984/2015 RAJEEV SAUMITRA Petitioner Mr. P.V.Kapur, Senior Advocate with Mr. Murari Tiwari, Advocate, Mr.

Rahul Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Devesh Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Vimal Nagrath, Advocate, Mr. Sidharth Kapur, Advocate, Ms. Kaveri Gupta, Advocate and Mr. Purav Mehta, Through:

Advocate.

versus NEETU SINGH Through:

Respondent Ms. Rajeshwari, Advocate.

By:AMULYA

w + CONT.CAS(C) 30/2016 Petitioner Mr. P.V.Kapur, Senior Advocate with Mr. Murari Tiwari, Advocate, Mr.

Rahul Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Devesh Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Vimal Nagrath, Advocate, Mr. Sidharth Kapur, Advocate, Ms. Kaveri Gupta, Advocate and Mr. Purav Mehta, RAJEEV SAUMITRA Through:

Advocate.

versus NEETU SINGH Respondent Through:

Ms. Rajeshwari, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKIJ. MEHTA

ORDER

o/o 11.10.2017 Contempt petitions are not pressed without prejudice to the claim and contentions of the petitioner in the contempt petitions that there is in fact a contempt committed by the respondent in the contempt petitions. In any case, since the powers of contempt are discretionary and the main appeal has been disposed of in view of the consent order between the parties dated 21.3.2016, therefore, in my opinion, no useful purpose will be served by continuing these contempt petitions and which are disposed of accordingly.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J OCTOBER 11,2017 Ne