Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
D.N. Patel, Jyoti Singh, JJ.
Shubham Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
New Delhi Municipal Corporation - Respondent
LPA 385 of 2021 and LPA 387 of 2021
Decided On : 25-10-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellant's challenge to the previous order. (Para 1) |
| 2. court's reasoning on the domain of early hearings. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. disposal of the letters patent appeals. (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
D.N. Patel, CJ. (ORAL)--Proceedings have been conducted through video conferencing.
CM APPL. 36992/2021 (Exemption) in LPA 385/2021
CM APPL. 37110/2021 (Exemption) in LPA 387/2021
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Applications stand disposed of.
LPA 385/2021
LPA 387/2021
1. Present Letters Patent Appeals have been preferred by the Original Petitioner challenging the impugned order dated 10.09.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) Nos. 10834/2019 and 13220/2019.
2. We have heard learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and have looked into the facts and circumstances of the case. The learned Single Judge has, vide the impugned order, declined to grant early hearing of the writ petitions to the Appellant herein. Apart from the fact that granting or declining early hearing of a petition filed before the learned Single Judge is really the domain of the concerned Bench, the present appeals cannot even otherwise be entertained, as no rights or liabilities of the parties to the lis had been decided by the impugned order and the Letters Patent Appeals are, therefore, untenable in law.
3. At this stage, learned counsel for the Appellant submits that in fact, the writ petitions ought to have been listed before the Division Bench as per the designated Roster and therefore, the writ petitions be transferred before this Bench. We see no reason to entertain the said request in the present appeals. In case the Appellant is of the view that the writ petitions are not to be heard by the learned Single Judge, it is open to the Appellant to prefer an appropriate application before the learned Single Judge, if so advised.
4. With these observations, these Letters Patent Appeals are hereby disposed of.
Letters Patent Appeals are untenable if no rights or liabilities of parties are decided in the impugned order.
An interim order can be upheld while expediting hearing in a related writ petition without addressing the substantive merits of the case.
Denial of EWS reservation in admission violates constitutional provisions; interim orders do not finalize rights, thus appealing them lacks merit.
The court emphasized the discretion of the lower court in managing procedural applications, including the denial of an early hearing for a pending writ petition.
Interim orders allowing status quo are upheld while relevant writ petitions are pending, highlighting the principle of maintaining legal stability during ongoing proceedings.
An appeal is not maintainable if no rights or liabilities have been adjudicated upon, thereby necessitating resolution of the underlying writ petition urgently.
A procedural docket order passed by a Single Judge does not qualify as a 'judgment' under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent and is therefore not subject to an intra-court writ appeal.
A prolonged delay in prosecuting a writ petition can justify dismissal, reflecting a lack of diligence and warranting costs against the Appellant.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
