Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Keshav Singh Vs. Dharmraj Singh

Keshav Singh vs Dharmraj Singh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Feb 04, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1042927

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Keshav Singh

Advocate Shri. K.K.Kushwaha

Respondent

Dharmraj Singh

Excerpt

1 mcc no.110/2013 04.02.2013 shri k.k.kushwaha learned counsel for the applicants. this is an application for restoration of s.a no.294/2011 dismissed for want of prosecution by order dated 03.01.2013. it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the aforesaid appeal stood dismissed on account of the fact that the counsel for the appellants could not notice the case in the cause list and as such could not remain present when the matter was called up for hearing and due to his non-appearance the appeal came to be dismissed for want of prosecution. in such circumstances, it is submitted that the application for restoration deserves to be allowed. the application is supported by an affidavit of the learned counsel for the applicants. having heard the learned counsel for the applicant and looking to the fact that the reasons stated in the application for restoration are bonafide, the same is allowed. the impugned order dated 03.01.2013 passed in s.a no.294/2011 is recalled and is directed to be restored to its original number. this m.c.c stands disposed of. a copy of this order be placed in the record of s.a no.294/2011. c.c as per rules. ( r.s.jha ) judge msp.mms/-

Full Judgment

1 MCC No.110/2013 04.02.2013 Shri K.K.Kushwaha learned counsel for the applicants.

This is an application for restoration of S.A No.294/2011 dismissed for want of prosecution by order dated 03.01.2013.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the aforesaid appeal stood dismissed on account of the fact that the counsel for the appellants could not notice the case in the cause list and as such could not remain present when the matter was called up for hearing and due to his non-appearance the appeal came to be dismissed for want of prosecution.

In such circumstances, it is submitted that the application for restoration deserves to be allowed.

The application is supported by an affidavit of the learned counsel for the applicants.

Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant and looking to the fact that the reasons stated in the application for restoration are bonafide, the same is allowed.

The impugned order dated 03.01.2013 passed in S.A No.294/2011 is recalled and is directed to be restored to its original number.

This M.C.C stands disposed of.

A copy of this order be placed in the record of S.A No.294/2011.

C.C as per rules.

( R.S.JHA ) JUDGE msp.mms/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial