Sandeep Gaur vs Tushita Vats
2021 Latest Caselaw 3243 Del

                            $~28 (2021)
                            *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                            %                             Date of decision: 29.11.2021
                            +     CONT.APP.(C) 14/2021
                                  SANDEEP GAUR                        ..... Appellant
                                                         Through:      Ms. Preeti Singh, Advocate.
                                                         versus
                                   TUSHITA VATS                                            ..... Respondent

                                                         Through:      None.
                                   CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL):-

CM APPL. 42479/2021

1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CONT.APP.(C) 14/2021 and CM APPL. 42478/2021 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant for stay on the operation of the order dated 06.08.2021]

2. This is an appeal filed against the interlocutory order dated 10.11.2021, passed by the learned single judge in Cont. Case (C) 572/2020. 2.1. Apart from the fact that we have serious doubts that an appeal against such an order can be maintained, according to us, the best way forward in the matter is to approach the learned single judge. 2.2. To be noted, the impugned order dated 10.11.2021 was passed in an application for early hearing, in which notice has been issued, returnable on 23.02.2022.

3. Ms. Preeti Singh, who appears on behalf of the appellant, says that, early hearing is sought as, while the appellant has no difficulty with the order dated 06.08.2021 passed by the learned single judge, there is some

Signature Not Verified Signed By:VIPIN KUMAR RAI

Signing Date:06.12.2021 15:07:17 difficulty being faced by the appellant, as regards the timings indicated therein.

3.1 Ms. Singh says that, since the appellant is working with a multi- national company (in short "MNC"), the meetings stipulated on a working day, between the mother and daughter, would cause complications for the appellant.

3.2. As indicated above, since the learned single judge is seized of the matter, the difficulty encountered can be placed before the learned single judge.

4. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 10.11.2021.

5. The appeal is accordingly closed. Consequently, pending application shall also stand closed.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

TALWANT SINGH, J NOVEMBER 29, 2021 tr Click here to check corrigendum, if any

Signature Not Verified Signed By:VIPIN KUMAR RAI

Signing Date:06.12.2021 15:07:17