imnawati Vs. Vinod Kumar

imnawati vs Vinod Kumar

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Apr 12, 2013

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1046503

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/1046503
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Apr 12, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

imnawati

Advocate Shri. Ashok Chakravarthy

Respondent

Vinod Kumar

Excerpt

1 w.p.no.5313/2013 12/4/2013: shri ashok chakravarthy, learned counsel for the petitioner. challenge in this writ petition is made to an interlocutory order dated 11.1.2013 and 30.1.2013 by which learned court has rejected an application filed by the petitioner for getting the finger prints in a will examined by a finger print expert. taking note of the totality of circumstances, it is seen that application has been rejected mainly on the ground that the petitioner while recording the evidence has already got the will exhibited and the court cannot permit calling for an expert for collection of evidence. that apart, in the order passed by the court on 11.1.2013 it is indicated that without giving the particulars of the handwriting expert and details, a vague application has been filed. taking note of the fact that the application has been rejected in due exercise of powers of discretion, no case is made out for interference in a petition under article 227 of the constitution. petition is therefore, dismissed. (rajendra menon) judge mrs.mishra

Full Judgment

1 W.P.No.5313/2013 12/4/2013: Shri Ashok Chakravarthy, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Challenge in this writ petition is made to an interlocutory order dated 11.1.2013 and 30.1.2013 by which learned Court has rejected an application filed by the petitioner for getting the finger prints in a Will examined by a finger print expert.

Taking note of the totality of circumstances, it is seen that application has been rejected mainly on the ground that the petitioner while recording the evidence has already got the Will exhibited and the Court cannot permit calling for an expert for collection of evidence.

That apart, in the order passed by the Court on 11.1.2013 it is indicated that without giving the particulars of the handwriting expert and details, a vague application has been filed.

Taking note of the fact that the application has been rejected in due exercise of powers of discretion, no case is made out for interference in a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution.

Petition is therefore, dismissed.

(Rajendra Menon) Judge Mrs.mishra

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