Phoolchand Sahu Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Phoolchand Sahu vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Feb 22, 2013

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1053991

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/1053991
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Feb 22, 2013
Subject: Banking

Case Summary

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

Banking

Key legal issue: Banking

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Phoolchand Sahu

Advocate Shri. K.K.Gautam

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

phoolchand sahu versus state of m.p.& others writ petition no.2428 ”22. 2.2013: shri k.k.gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner. challenging an order passed by the tehsildar shahpura exercising powers under section 250 of the m.p.land revenue code, this writ petition has been filed. against the order passed by the tehsildar petitioner has remedy to file firs.appeal and second appeal under section 44 and revision under section 50 of the act, therefore, a petition directly before this court, by-passing the three tier statutory remedy available, is not permissible. accordingly, granting liberty to the petitioner to take recours.of statutory remedy available, this petition is disposed of. (rajendra menon) judge ss/-

Full Judgment

Phoolchand Sahu versus State of M.P.& Others Writ Petition No.2428 ”

22. 2.2013: Shri K.K.Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Challenging an order passed by the Tehsildar Shahpura exercising powers under Section 250 of the M.P.Land Revenue Code, this writ petition has been filed.

Against the order passed by the Tehsildar petitioner has remedy to file FiRs.Appeal and Second Appeal under Section 44 and Revision under Section 50 of the Act, therefore, a petition directly before this Court, by-passing the three tier statutory remedy available, is not permissible.

Accordingly, granting liberty to the petitioner to take recouRs.of statutory remedy available, this petition is disposed of.

(Rajendra Menon) Judge ss/-

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties Phoolchand Sahu vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Banking