Ramesh Kumar Singh Vs. Nachai

Ramesh Kumar Singh vs Nachai

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Feb 27, 2013

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1051987

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/1051987
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Feb 27, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ramesh Kumar Singh

Advocate Shri. K.S.Baghel

Respondent

Nachai

Excerpt

ramesh kumar singh versus nachai & others m.c.c.no.246 ”27. 2.2013: shri k.s.baghel, learned counsel for the applicant. this application has been filed for restoration of w.p.no.1055/2011, which was dismissed for want of prosecution on 16.4.2012. there being a delay in filing this application, therefore, i.a.no.2203/2013 has been filed for condoning the delay. delay in filing the application as well as default itself is attributed to some lapses on the part of counsel and applications are supported by affidavit of the counsel himself and there is no reason to disbelieve its bonafide. considering the same both the applications, i.e.application for condonation of delay and restoration application itself, are allowed. delay is condoned and w.p.no.1055/2011 is restored to its original file. it be placed for orders before an appropriate bench application stands allowed and disposed of. (rajendra menon) judge ss/

Full Judgment

Ramesh Kumar Singh versus Nachai & Others M.C.C.No.246 ”

27. 2.2013: Shri K.S.Baghel, learned counsel for the applicant.

This application has been filed for restoration of W.P.No.1055/2011, which was dismissed for want of prosecution on 16.4.2012.

There being a delay in filing this application, therefore, I.A.No.2203/2013 has been filed for condoning the delay.

Delay in filing the application as well as default itself is attributed to some lapses on the part of counsel and applications are supported by affidavit of the counsel himself and there is no reason to disbelieve its bonafide.

Considering the same both the applications, i.e.application for condonation of delay and restoration application itself, are allowed.

Delay is condoned and W.P.No.1055/2011 is restored to its original file.

It be placed for orders before an Appropriate Bench Application stands allowed and disposed of.

(Rajendra Menon) Judge ss/

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties Ramesh Kumar Singh vs Nachai Same Subject Education