Koushilya Bai v. M C D And ORS

$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5659/2016 KOUSHILYA BAI ..... Petitioner Through Dr.Jose P.Vergeesh and Mr.Dhruv Jose Jawahar Singh, Advocates.

versus M C D AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr.Mukesh Gupta, Advocate for SDMC.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

O R D E R

% 08.07.2016 File taken up today as 07.7.2016 was declared holiday. This petition has become infructuous. It has challenged the notice to show cause as to why sealing of the petitioner's property be not effected.

After that date, learned counsel for the SDMC, points out that a sealing order has been passed and copy of that order dated 19.5.2016 has been furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner. This is without prejudice to the submission made by learned counsel for the SDMC that the order dated 19.5.2016 has already been intimated to the petitioner.

Be that as it may, noting the above factual position, this petition has become infructuous. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to take

appropriate action against the order dated 19.5.2016 before the appropriate forum.

Learned counsel for the SDMC points out that the order dated 10.6.2016 vide which the MCD (Appellate) Tribunal had vacated the status quo order is the subject matter of a separate petition in which this order dated 10.6.2016 has been challenged by the petitioner. Needless to state that SDMC will take action as per law. Petition disposed of.

INDERMEET KAUR, J JULY 08, 2016 ndn