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.

Babu Vs. Khilla (D) Smt. Parmi

Babu vs Khilla (D) Smt. Parmi

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Aug 01, 2012
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1050607

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
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Babu

Respondent

Khilla (D) Smt. Parmi

Advocate Shri. J.L.Soni

Excerpt

f.a.no.36/2011 01.08.2012 ku. vandana shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant. respondent no.1 (i)-smt. parmi is reportedly dead. shri j.l.soni, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 (ii).none for respondent no.1 (iii) to (vi).2 and 3, although served. ku. savita choudhary, learned pl for respondent no.4. heard on ia no.1250/12, an application under order 22 rule 2 of the cpc for deleting the name of respondent no.1 (i) - smt. parmi. as per averments of this ia, the legal representatives of deceased - respondent are already on record as respondent no.1 (iii) to (vi).thus, there is no necessity to take any steps in this regard. in the aforesaid premises, by allowing the ia, the appellant's counsel is permitted to delete the name of respondent no.1 (i) from the array of appeal memo. such exercise be carried out within seven days, failing which this appeal shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference to the bench. ( u.c.maheshwari ) judge bks

Full Judgment

F.A.No.36/2011 01.08.2012 Ku.

Vandana Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant.

Respondent No.1 (i)-Smt.

Parmi is reportedly dead.

Shri J.L.Soni, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 (ii).None for respondent No.1 (iii) to (vi).2 and 3, although served.

Ku.

Savita Choudhary, learned PL for respondent no.4.

Heard on IA No.1250/12, an application under Order 22 Rule 2 of the CPC for deleting the name of respondent No.1 (i) - Smt.

Parmi.

As per averments of this IA, the legal representatives of deceased - respondent are already on record as respondent No.1 (iii) to (vi).Thus, there is no necessity to take any steps in this regard.

In the aforesaid premises, by allowing the IA, the appellant's counsel is permitted to delete the name of respondent no.1 (i) from the array of appeal memo.

Such exercise be carried out within seven days, failing which this appeal shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference to the Bench.

( U.C.Maheshwari ) Judge bks

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial