Rajkumar v. The Delhi Development Authority

Delhi High Court · 02 Mar 2020 · 2020:DHC:3838
Sanjeev Sachdeva
W.P.(C)326/2019
2020:DHC:3838
civil petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed multiple writ petitions for non-prosecution where petitioners failed to appear and no extension of time to vacate premises was granted beyond the stipulated deadline.

Full Text
Translation output
c r $-36-40 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C)326/2019
RAJKUMAR p Petitioner
Through: None,
VERSUS
THEDELHIDEVELOPMENTAUTHORITY&ORS....respondents
Through. Ms.Shobhana Takiar,Advocatefor R-1.
W.P.(C)1104/2019
BHAGWATIDEVI@BHAGATIDEVI Petitioner
Through: None.
VERSUS
THEDELHIDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS.
Respondents
Through: Mr.Ajay Birbal,Advocate for R-1.
W.P.(C)1105/2019
BISHAN LAL Petitioner
Through: None,
VERSUS
THE DELHIDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS.
Through: Mr.Ajay Birbal,Advocate for R-1.
\A W.P.(C)2988/2019 PRABHATILAL(SINCE DECEASED)
(THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIR) Petitioner W.P[C)326/2019&connected matters Page1
2020:DHC:3838 w
VERSUS
Through: Ms.Kajri Gupta,Advocate for R-1.
W.P.(C)3098/2019
HARILAL SAINI Petitioner (^'
VERSUS
Through: Ms.Kajri Gupta,Advocate for R-1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
02.03.2020 It is pointed out by learned counsel for the respondent that in the connected petitions ofsimilarly situated persons,time was granted to them to vacate the subject premises on or before 31.12.2019.
Learned counsel further submits that thereafter they had sought extension oftime which was declined by this Court.
None appears for the petitioner.
The petitions are dismissed for non prosecution. u-J /
SA^JEJeV SACHDEVA,J MARCH02,2020 ^ rk W.PfC)326/2019&connected matters Page 2
2020:DHC:3838
JUDGMENT