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

2010 Supreme(Raj) 638

MAHESH BHAGWATI
Panchu Ram – Appellant
Versus
Satyanarayan Jat – Respondent


Advocates Appeared
Shobhit Tiwari, counsel for Petitioner;
Gaurav Gupta, counsel for Respondent.

Hon'ble BHAGWATI, J.—By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has implored to quash and set-aside the orders dated 30th August, 2006 and 26th October, 2006 rendered by Additional District Judge, Kotputli, District Jaipur, whereby the opportunity for filing written-statement was closed and the application under Order VIII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure was dismissed accordingly.

2. Background facts of the case depict that plaintiff-respondent filed a civil suit for damages before the Additional District Judge, Kotputli, Jaipur on the premise that he suffered damages on account of a false FIR having been lodged against him by the petitioner at Police Station, Pragpura. In this suit, Shri Purshottam Bidani, Advocate put his appearance on behalf of respondent No.1 on 22nd May, 2006 and filed his powers accordingly. He gave an undertaking to the Court to file powers on behalf of respondent No. 2 and written-statement on the next date of hearing. The case was adjourned to 30th August, 2006. On 30th August, 2006, learned counsel for the respondents had gone out of headquarter due to some urgent work and one brief holder Advocate appeared for him. Brief holder prayed the learned Cour
















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