In the previous hearing, the petitioner submitted before the Court that the people of Delhi need a dedicated facility from the Government to help them in handling and transporting the dead bodies infected of Covid.
Justice Midha said this case will not be used as precedent and after this case we will try to change the railway claims and reform the policy. He also requested the railway department to show some sympathy.
In light of the above, the plea prays for quashing of sale/auction notice dated 05.05.21 or in the alternative a direction to Ld. DRT-II, New Delhi, to hear and decide the case of the petitioner as per rules and procedures set out in the SARFAESI Act,2002 and in accordance with the RBI guidelines.
The wife of the accused filed a complaint against her husband and in-laws accusing them of forcing her into illicit physical relationships with other men.
Justice JR Midha made it clear that “it appeared that the suit was filed to garner publicity,” noting how Chawla had circulated a web link of the hearing on social media. The cost was imposed also on other plaintiffs.
Justice Prateek Jalan asked the counsel appearing for CBSE to reply,”what is that separate scheme for students who are enrolled in the secondary school Certificate Examination, and when are you announcing that?”
The Delhi High Court has sought a response from the Registrar General of Delhi High Court and the Delhi government in a petition seeking direction to make, and issue general rules for regulating the practice and proceedings of district courts in the best interest of justice.
It was submitted by Additional Public Prosecutor Sanjeev Sabharwal that after filing of the charge sheet, a supplementary statement of the complainant was recorded on 25.05.2021 in which the complainant has further clarified the allegations