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

P.C.MISHRA, MRINALINI PADHI, BISWANATH RATH
GHANASHYAM PATEL – Appellant
Versus
RENUKA SHARMA – Respondent


ORDER

Mr. Justice P.C. Misra, President—The appellant has filed this appeal in person, but does not appear today when the case is called for hearing. The respondents have not appeared though noticed. We examined the records of the District Forum (C.D. Case No. 6/95 before the District Forum, Sambalpur) and perused the impugned order. In the circumstances, we proceed to dispose of this appeal in the absence of both parties.

2. The complainant in C.D. Case No. 6 of 1995 of the District Forum, Sambalpur is the appellant in this appeal. The complainant appellant is an Advocate who had appeared for one Dr. H.B. Khorana in H.R.C. Misc. Case No. 4 of 1988 pending in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate-cum-House Rent Controller, Sambalpur. He filed a copy application praying for urgent certified copy of the deposition of one Saroj Manjari Devi in the said case. He has stated that the said certified copy was necessary to be filed before the Hon'ble High Court in a pending writ application, that is, O.J.C. No. 3510 of 1994. According to him, the urgent certified copy was to be given to him on the same day or on the day following. But he was not supplied with the copy upto 5 p.m





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