High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/13244/2006

Mcd v. Mahavir

2017-10-24Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw2 pages

$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 13244/2006 MCD ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Arun Birbal, Advocate

Versus

MAHAVIR ..... Respondent Through:

Nemo.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

O R D E R

% 06.12.2018 C.M. 44612/2018 (u/S 151 CPC) There is delay of 319 days' in filing the accompanying application for restoration.

Respondent is served but there is no appearance on his behalf. Upon hearing, I find that averments made in this application provide sufficient cause to condone the delay occasioned. Application is allowed and delay is condoned.

The application is disposed of.

C.M. 44611/2018 By way of this application, recall of order of 24th October, 2017 is sought.

Respondent has been served but there is no appearance on his behalf.

Page | 1

For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed and order of 24th October, 2018 is recalled and the petition is restored to its original position.

The application is disposed of.

W.P.(C) 13244/2006 & C.M. 44613/2018 (for stay) Despite service, there is no appearance on behalf of respondent. List for hearing on 7th May, 2019.

Interim order of 25th August, 2006 to continue. Dasti.

SUNIL GAUR, J DECEMBER 06, 2018 r Page | 2