Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5. The Court has heard the submissions of Ms. Makhija and Mr. Nayar as well as Mr. T. Singhdev, Counsel for the NMC. From the facts narrated above, the dispute between the parties appears to be civil in nature involving complex disputed questions of fact. Nonetheless, the Court has understood that the Petitioner's primary grievance in the present proceedings stems This is a digitally signed order.

6. Mr. T. Singhdev, Counsel for the NMC has pointed out that the issues raised by the Petitioner are beyond the scope and adjudicatory powers of the NMC. According to him the complaint is misconceived.

7. Be that as it may, considering the limited prayers sought in the present petition and both the contesting parties being present before the Court, it is considered appropriate to dispose of the present petition with the following directions:

7.3 NMC is directed to dispose of the said complaint within a period of two weeks thereafter by passing a speaking order, in accordance with law.

8. All rights and contentions of the parties, including the ones pertaining to the issues raised by Mr. Singhdev, are left open. The Court has not examined the merits of the contentions urged by the Petitioner or the response submitted by the HIMSR.