M/S Bird Worldwide Flight Service (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union Of India & ORS

$~41 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3805/2017 & C.M. No.5128/2019 M/S BIRD WORLDWIDE FLIGHT SERVICE (INDIA) PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Virender Mehta & Mr.Kunal Mehta, Advs.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through:

None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

O R D E R

% 04.02.2019 & C.M. No.5128/2019 (for disposal of the writ petition) 1.

Vide the present application the petitioner seeks disposal of writ petition by quashing complaints case nos. 131/2M/2017 and 133/2L/2017 respectively pending before Patiala House Courts , both fixed for 08.03.2019. Despite service of advance notice, non appear for the respondents.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by way of the writ petition, the petitioner has inter alia sought a direction to the respondent no.2 to cancel the registration granted to the respondent no.3/Union vide Registration Certificate No.DRTU/2013/32/SWD dated 07.08.2013.In the petition, certain ancillary reliefs, which are

claimed be consequential to the registration in favour of the respondent no.3, have been also sought 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner had before filing the petition, already submitted a representation to the respondent no.2 seeking cancellation of the respondent no.3's registration which had remained unanswered , this Court had vide its order dated 02.05.2017 directed the respondent no.2 to decide the petitioner's representation by passing a reasoned order. He further submits that consequently the respondent no.2 has vide its order dated 12.11.2018 passed an order cancelling the impugned registration certificate dated 07.08.2013 in favour of the respondent no.3 by specifically stating therein that the said certificate would be treated as cancelled ab initio. He therefore, submits that the criminal complaints which had been filed relying on the impugned registration certificate are also liable to be quashed. 4.

After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner states that since the main prayer in the petition stands satisfied, he does not wish to press the present petition any further, but seeks liberty to take appropriate action in accordance with law qua his other reliefs. 5.

The petition is disposed of as not pressed along with the pending application with liberty as prayed for. 6.

The earlier date fixed i.e. 15.02.2019 stands cancelled. REKHA PALLI, J FEBRUARY 04, 2019 gm