We have been serving our clients from all over India in their major conflicts. We at our firm put our best possible efforts to minimize the problem of our client which outreach as our finest attributes of being the Best Advocate in Delhi & Divorce lawyer in Rohini.
CM(M) 1063/2025 with CM Applications 35712/2025 and related applications
The Delhi High Court's supplementary cause list dated 30 May 2025 records Ankit Gupta v. Shikha Gupta, CM(M) 1063/2025, along with CM Applications 35712/2025 and related applications. The record identifies Adv. Neha Batra as counsel for the petitioner.
The proceeding was before the High Court of Delhi in its civil miscellaneous jurisdiction.
A CM(M) proceeding before the Delhi High Court generally concerns the Court's supervisory or revisional jurisdiction over orders passed by subordinate courts or tribunals.
Such litigation requires the advocate to demonstrate why the impugned order warrants High Court intervention rather than simply rearguing the entire dispute on factual grounds.
The case illustrates an important aspect of appellate and supervisory litigation, where careful identification of the nature of the alleged error is essential.
Whether the subordinate court or tribunal acted beyond the jurisdiction available to it.
Whether the impugned order involves an identifiable error in the application or interpretation of law.
Whether a material procedural irregularity affected the proceedings or the impugned order.
Whether the challenge is merely a disagreement with factual conclusions reached by the lower court.
This makes careful preparation of the procedural history and identification of the precise legal or procedural error particularly important in supervisory litigation.