Ganga Prasad Vs. Devi Singh Parihar

Ganga Prasad vs Devi Singh Parihar

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Oct 16, 2012

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1042115

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/1042115
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Oct 16, 2012
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ganga Prasad

Advocate Shri. A.L.Gupta

Respondent

Devi Singh Parihar

Advocate Shri. Shiv Kumar Shrivastav

Excerpt

1 m.c.c.no.1118 o”16. 10.2012 shri a.l.gupta, counsel for the applicant. shri shiv kumar shrivastav, counsel for respondents no.4 to 7 heard. this petition is preferred for restoration of w.p no.13433/06 which has been dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 12.3.2012. i am apprised by the petitioner's counsel that in the aforesaid dismissal of the petition, respondents no.1 to 3 were not represented in the writ petition. having perused the petition, for the reasons stated in it also keeping in view the principle that litigant should not suffer because of mistake of the counsel, considering the aforesaid cause as sufficient, by allowing this petition,the aforesaid writ petition is restored to its original number with a direction to list the same in the week commencing 5.11.12 for further orders.the petition is allowed as indicated above. (u.c.maheshwari) judge mkl

Full Judgment

1 M.C.C.No.1118 o”

16. 10.2012 Shri A.L.Gupta, counsel for the applicant.

Shri Shiv Kumar Shrivastav, counsel for respondents No.4 to 7 Heard.

This petition is preferred for restoration of W.P No.13433/06 which has been dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 12.3.2012.

I am apprised by the petitioner's counsel that in the aforesaid dismissal of the petition, respondents No.1 to 3 were not represented in the writ petition.

Having perused the petition, for the reasons stated in it also Keeping in view the principle that litigant should not suffer because of mistake of the counsel, considering the aforesaid cause as sufficient, by allowing this petition,the aforesaid writ petition is restored to its original number with a direction to list the same in the week commencing 5.11.12 for further ordeRs.The petition is allowed as indicated above.

(U.C.Maheshwari) Judge MKL

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2012 Same Parties Ganga Prasad vs Devi Singh Parihar Same Subject Education