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.

Rajesh Albert Vs. Akhilesh Albert

Rajesh Albert vs Akhilesh Albert

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Nov 07, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1050899

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

Rajesh Albert

Advocate Shri. R.D.Hundikar

Respondent

Akhilesh Albert

Excerpt

1 w.p.no.17735 o”07. 11.2012 shri r.d.hundikar, counsel for the petitioner. he is heard on the question of admission. the petitioner has filed this petition under article 227 of the constitution of india for quashment of the order dated 29.9.12 annex.p/1 passed by the additional collector, damoh in revenue revision no.28/b-121/2011-12. it appears that such revision was filed by the petitioner against some order passed by the subordinate revenue authority but neither the copy of the application filed before such authority not the copy of the order passed by such authority which was the subject matter of the impugned revision, has been placed on record by the petitioner, hence he is directed to place such documents on record within 15 days. apart the above, it is apparent fact that the order of the addl. collector has been challenged in this petition but such authority has not been impleaded as party in the present petition. hence, petitioner's counsel is directed to take appropriate steps to implead such authority as party or file appropriate application in this regard within 15 days. apart the above, petitioner's counsel is also directed to examine the matter keeping in view the provision of section 44 and 50 of the madhya pradesh land revenue code in which against the order passed by the collector, appeal /revision are provided then in view of such available alternate statutory forum how this petition could be entertained against the order annex.p/1 let this matter be listed for further consideration in the week commencing 10.12.2012. (u.c.maheshwari) judge mkl

Full Judgment

1 W.P.No.17735 o”

07. 11.2012 Shri R.D.Hundikar, counsel for the petitioner.

He is heard on the question of admission.

The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashment of the order dated 29.9.12 Annex.P/1 passed by the Additional Collector, Damoh in Revenue Revision No.28/B-121/2011-12.

It appears that such revision was filed by the petitioner against some order passed by the subordinate revenue authority but neither the copy of the application filed before such authority not the copy of the order passed by such authority which was the subject matter of the impugned revision, has been placed on record by the petitioner, hence he is directed to place such documents on record within 15 days.

Apart the above, it is apparent fact that the order of the Addl.

Collector has been challenged in this petition but such authority has not been impleaded as party in the present petition.

Hence, petitioner's counsel is directed to take appropriate steps to implead such authority as party or file appropriate application in this regard within 15 days.

Apart the above, petitioner's counsel is also directed to examine the matter keeping in view the provision of section 44 and 50 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code in which against the order passed by the Collector, appeal /revision are provided then in view of such available alternate statutory forum how this petition could be entertained against the order Annex.P/1 Let this matter be listed for further consideration in the week commencing 10.12.2012.

(U.C.Maheshwari) Judge MKL

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial