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.

Rajdeep Singh Vs. Pradeep Tripathi

Rajdeep Singh vs Pradeep Tripathi

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Mar 22, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1045456

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

Rajdeep Singh

Advocate Shri. K.D.Singh

Respondent

Pradeep Tripathi

Advocate Shri. Ajay Tiwari

Excerpt

mcr.c.no.1822 o”22. 03.13 shri k.d.singh, counsel for the applicant. shri ajay tiwari, counsel for the respondents. this case is listed today for appropriate order on not compliance of the court order 13.2.13 by the applicant so also for consideration of ia no.5885/13 respondent's application for vacating ex- parte stay granted earlier. in the available circumstances of the matter, instead to hear the case on the aforesaid objection or not compliance of order dated 13.2.13 as well as the aforesaid ia for vacating the stay or the stay application of the applicant ia no.3267/13, with the consent of the parties, this petition is taken up for final disposal. counsel present are heard on merits. the applicant/ accused has filed this petition under section 482 of the cr.p.c being aggrieved by the order dated 8.1.13 passed by vi the asj.rewa in cr.r.no.298/12 (annex.a-1) affirming the order dated 9.10.12 passed by jmfc, rewa in criminal case no.189/10 whereby the application of the applicant/accused to summon one raj kumar as his defense witness in the matter, has been rejected. initially the case was argued at length by the applicant's counsel but in view of section 139 of the negotiable instrument act, on making certain query from him, on which, instead to argue further at this stage, seeks permission to withdraw this petition as not pressed with liberty to raise all the objection and grounds stated in the petition, subject to final judgment of the trial court, on arising the occasion in a duly constituted appeal or other criminal proceedings permissible under the law. considering the aforesaid prayer, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed with liberty aforesaid. (u.c.maheshwari) judge mkl

Full Judgment

Mcr.C.No.1822 o”

22. 03.13 Shri K.D.Singh, counsel for the applicant.

Shri Ajay Tiwari, counsel for the respondents.

This case is listed today for appropriate order on not compliance of the court order 13.2.13 by the applicant so also for consideration of IA No.5885/13 respondent's application for vacating ex- parte stay granted earlier.

In the available circumstances of the matter, instead to hear the case on the aforesaid objection or not compliance of order dated 13.2.13 as well as the aforesaid IA for vacating the stay or the stay application of the applicant IA No.3267/13, with the consent of the parties, this petition is taken up for final disposal.

Counsel present are heard on merits.

The applicant/ accused has filed this petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C being aggrieved by the order dated 8.1.13 passed by VI the ASJ.Rewa in Cr.R.No.298/12 (Annex.A-1) affirming the order dated 9.10.12 passed by JMFC, Rewa in Criminal Case No.189/10 whereby the application of the applicant/accused to summon one Raj Kumar as his defense witness in the matter, has been rejected.

Initially the case was argued at length by the applicant's counsel but in view of section 139 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, on making certain query from him, on which, instead to argue further at this stage, seeks permission to withdraw this petition as not pressed with liberty to raise all the objection and grounds stated in the petition, subject to final judgment of the trial court, on arising the occasion in a duly constituted appeal or other criminal proceedings permissible under the law.

Considering the aforesaid prayer, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed with liberty aforesaid.

(U.C.Maheshwari) Judge MKL

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial