Nandram Vs. Rameshwar

Nandram vs Rameshwar

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Dec 12, 2012

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1049147

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/1049147
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Dec 12, 2012
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Nandram

Advocate Shri. C.L.Sethi

Respondent

Rameshwar

Excerpt

m.c.c.no.1399/2012 12.12.2012 heard shri c.l.sethi, learned counsel for applicant on the application for restoration of w.p.no.16173/12. it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that as the counsel appearing for the petitioner could not understand the peremptory order, compliance was not made within the stipulated period which resulted in dismissal of the writ petition for non- compliance of the peremptory order . the application is supported by an affidavit of the counsel for the applicant and as the reasons stated therein appear to be bona fide, the application for restoration is allowed. the impugned order dated 03.10.2012 passed in w.p.no.16173/12 is recalled and the aforesaid writ petition is directed to be restored to its original number. m.c.c.stands allowed accordingly. a copy of this order be placed in the record of w.p.no.16173/12. c.c.as per rules. (r.s.jha) judge msp

Full Judgment

M.C.C.No.1399/2012 12.12.2012 Heard Shri C.L.Sethi, learned counsel for applicant on the application for restoration of W.P.No.16173/12.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that as the counsel appearing for the petitioner could not understand the peremptory order, compliance was not made within the stipulated period which resulted in dismissal of the writ petition for non- compliance of the peremptory order .

The application is supported by an affidavit of the counsel for the applicant and as the reasons stated therein appear to be bona fide, the application for restoration is allowed.

The impugned order dated 03.10.2012 passed in W.P.No.16173/12 is recalled and the aforesaid writ petition is directed to be restored to its original number.

M.C.C.stands allowed accordingly.

A copy of this order be placed in the record of W.P.No.16173/12.

C.C.as per rules.

(R.S.Jha) Judge msp

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2012 Same Parties Nandram vs Rameshwar Same Subject Education