SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

D.R.VITHAL RAO, K.R.RAMASWAMY IYENGAR, SUSHEELA CHELUVARAJU
R. SATHYANARAYANA – Appellant
Versus
REGISTRAR, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – Respondent


ORDER

Mr. Justice D.R. Vithal Rao, President — The complainant is present. This complaint is filed by the complainant against the Registrar, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi, alleging that he has failed to supply him certified copy required by him.

2. The Supreme Court functions in New Delhi. Therefore, this Commission has no territorial jurisdiction to give the relief sought for by him and moreover the complainant has sought compensation of Rs. 10,000/-. Therefore, this Commission gets no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint on this count as well. Hence, the complaint is rejected.

Complaint rejected.

_____

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top