Kranti Kumar JaIn Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Kranti Kumar Jain vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Nov 09, 2012

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1046964

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/1046964
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Nov 09, 2012
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Kranti Kumar Jain

Advocate Shri. Kunal Thakre

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

1....w.a.no.1287 of 2012 kranti kumar jain & anr. state of m.p.and ors.08.11.2012 shri kishore shrivastava, learned senior advocate with shri kunal thakre, counsel for the appellants. shri vijay pandey, dy. a.g.for the respondents. admit. notice on behalf of respondents is accepted by shri pandey. shri pandey prays for four weeks time to file reply. prayer allowed. list for hearing after four weeks. ad interim writ : till next date of hearing, it is directed that status quo as on today in respect of possession over the disputed land be maintained by both the parties. list for hearing in the 1st week of january,2013. c.c.as per rules. (krishn kumar lahoti) (smt. vimla jain) judge judge vj

Full Judgment

1....W.A.No.1287 of 2012 Kranti Kumar Jain & anr.

State of M.P.and ORS.08.11.2012 Shri Kishore Shrivastava, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Kunal Thakre, Counsel for the appellants.

Shri Vijay Pandey, Dy.

A.G.for the respondents.

Admit.

Notice on behalf of respondents is accepted by Shri Pandey.

Shri Pandey prays for four weeks time to file reply.

Prayer allowed.

List for hearing after four weeks.

Ad interim writ : Till next date of hearing, it is directed that status quo as on today in respect of possession over the disputed land be maintained by both the parties.

List for hearing in the 1st week of January,2013.

C.C.as per rules.

(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.

Vimla Jain) Judge Judge vj

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2012 Same Parties Kranti Kumar Jain vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Education