Vinod Kumar Vs. Shiv Kumar Garg

Vinod Kumar vs Shiv Kumar Garg

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Apr 30, 2013

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1041686

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1041686
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Apr 30, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Vinod Kumar

Respondent

Shiv Kumar Garg

Excerpt

writ petition no ::7638. / 2013 vinot kumar versus shiv kumar garg and others 30.04.2013. shri p.l.pandya for the petitioner. shri rajesh tiwari, government advocate, for the state on advance notice. against the order impugned passed by the 2nd civil judge class i, satna granting injunction in a proceeding held under order 39 rules 1 and 2 of the code of civil procedure, petitioner has a remedy of filing an appeal under order 43 rule 1(r) cpc before the district judge, therefore, a petition under article 227 of the constitution bypassing this remedy of appeal, is not maintainable. accordingly, granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal as indicated hereinabove, this petition is disposed of. certified copy as per rules. (rajendra menon) judge aks/-

Full Judgment

Writ Petition No ::

7638. / 2013 Vinot Kumar versus Shiv Kumar Garg and others 30.04.2013.

Shri P.L.Pandya for the petitioner.

Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Government Advocate, for the State on advance notice.

Against the order impugned passed by the 2nd Civil Judge Class I, Satna granting injunction in a proceeding held under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, petitioner has a remedy of filing an appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(R) CPC before the District Judge, therefore, a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution bypassing this remedy of appeal, is not maintainable.

Accordingly, granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal as indicated hereinabove, this petition is disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

(RAJENDRA MENON) JUDGE Aks/-

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties Vinod Kumar vs Shiv Kumar Garg Same Subject Education