Full Text
Translation output
$-29-32 (common order)
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CM(M) 1420/2017 and CMNo.45476/2017
M/S ICICI BANK LIMITED Petitioner
Through: Mr. Punit K. Bhalla, Adv.
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CM(M) 1420/2017 and CMNo.45476/2017
M/S ICICI BANK LIMITED Petitioner
Through: Mr. Punit K. Bhalla, Adv.
VERSUS
SUDHIR SINGH ....... Respondent
Through
Through
CM(M) 1421/2017 and CM No.45480/2017
VERSUS
VIPIN GUPTA Respondent
Through
Through
CM(M) 1422/2017 and CMNo.45526/2017
M/S ICICI BANK Petitioner V Through: Mr. Punit K. Bhalla, Adv.
M/S ICICI BANK Petitioner V Through: Mr. Punit K. Bhalla, Adv.
VERSUS
KISHAN SINGH ..... Respondent
Through
Through
CM(M) 1423/2017 and CMNo.45533/2017
VERSUS
SANDEEP SETHT Respondent
Through 2017:DHC:8818
Through 2017:DHC:8818
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
15.12.2017 The petitioner is aggrieved because, on his civil suits (CS.
Nos.3741/2017, 370/2017, 3753/2017 & 3743/2017), the Additional District
Judge, by his similar orders dated 16.11.2017, has issued summons for settlement of issues and notice on the applications filed therewith for
12.03.2018, without considering the prayer for ex parte appointment of a receiver under Order 40 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), the denial of immediate relief being likely to cause irreparable loss frustrating the objective.
Indeed, if a party seeks ex parte relief, the court is expected to pass an appropriate order, one way or the other, expeditiously within reasonable time.
The petitioner, at this stage, submitted that he may be allowed to withdraw the present petitions and the applications filed therewith and instead approach the trial court by a fresh application seeking early decision in the matters.
The petitions and the applications filed therewith are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty, as prayed, granted.
Dasti under the signature of Court Master.
CR.K.G' A., 0J DECEMBER 15, 2017 vk 2017:DHC:8818
15.12.2017 The petitioner is aggrieved because, on his civil suits (CS.
Nos.3741/2017, 370/2017, 3753/2017 & 3743/2017), the Additional District
Judge, by his similar orders dated 16.11.2017, has issued summons for settlement of issues and notice on the applications filed therewith for
12.03.2018, without considering the prayer for ex parte appointment of a receiver under Order 40 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), the denial of immediate relief being likely to cause irreparable loss frustrating the objective.
Indeed, if a party seeks ex parte relief, the court is expected to pass an appropriate order, one way or the other, expeditiously within reasonable time.
The petitioner, at this stage, submitted that he may be allowed to withdraw the present petitions and the applications filed therewith and instead approach the trial court by a fresh application seeking early decision in the matters.
The petitions and the applications filed therewith are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty, as prayed, granted.
Dasti under the signature of Court Master.
CR.K.G' A., 0J DECEMBER 15, 2017 vk 2017:DHC:8818
JUDGMENT