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.

Roshan Lal Vs. Arjun

Roshan Lal vs Arjun

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jun 20, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1044687

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
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Roshan Lal

Advocate Shri. Sanjay Verma

Respondent

Arjun

Excerpt

writ petition no.10407/2013 20.06.2013 shri sanjay verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. shri lalit joglekar, learned pl for respondent nos.3 and 4. heard on the question of admission. the petitioner has filed this petition under article 226 of the constitution of india for quashment of the order dated 23.5.2013, passed by the respondent no.4-sdo in some revenue case whereby on account of not compliance of some order passed under section 250 (b) of m.p.land revenue code, he has been directed to send civil jail and on passing such an order, the petitioner present in the court has left the court without permission of the presiding officer, on which his warrant of arrest has been directed. after arguing the case for near about 10-15 minutes in response of some query of the court instead to argue further, the petitioner's counsel seeks permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to file a revision under the aforesaid code or in any other appropriate proceeding, permissible under the law to challenge the impugned order before the appropriate forum or the authority, so also the liberty to file to file appropriate application in same pending cases at the instance of the present petitioner before any of the superior revenue authorities. considering the aforesaid prayer without expressing any opinion on merits of the impugned order, this petition is hereby dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed with liberty, as prayed by the petitioner's counsel. c c as per rules. (u.c.maheshwari) judge bks

Full Judgment

Writ Petition No.10407/2013 20.06.2013 Shri Sanjay Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Shri Lalit Joglekar, learned PL for respondent Nos.3 and 4.

Heard on the question of admission.

The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashment of the order dated 23.5.2013, passed by the respondent no.4-SDO in some revenue case whereby on account of not compliance of some order passed under Section 250 (b) of M.P.Land Revenue Code, he has been directed to send civil jail and on passing such an order, the petitioner present in the court has left the court without permission of the Presiding Officer, on which his warrant of arrest has been directed.

After arguing the case for near about 10-15 minutes in response of some query of the court instead to argue further, the petitioner's counsel seeks permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to file a revision under the aforesaid Code or in any other appropriate proceeding, permissible under the law to challenge the impugned order before the appropriate forum or the authority, so also the liberty to file to file appropriate application in same pending cases at the instance of the present petitioner before any of the superior revenue authorities.

Considering the aforesaid prayer without expressing any opinion on merits of the impugned order, this petition is hereby dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed with liberty, as prayed by the petitioner's counsel.

C c as per rules.

(U.C.Maheshwari) Judge bks

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial