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

2023 Supreme(All) 2327

JAYANT BANERJI
Anurag Srivastava – Appellant
Versus
Radhika Devi – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ashish Kumar Srivastava.
For the Respondent: Rahul Mishra, Sanjay Mishra.

JUDGMENT

Jayant Banerji, J.

Heard Shri Ashish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner-applicant and Shri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent No.1.

As is reflected in the previous order dated 27.7.2023 passed by this Court, Shri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent No.1 had stated that he did not propose to file any counter affidavit as the material on record is sufficient. Therefore, with the consent of the parties, this case is being taken up for consideration and disposal.

2. This petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:

    "(i) Issue an appropriate order or direction to set aside the judgment and order dated 2.3.2023 passed by District Judge Varanasi in Civil Revision No. NIL of 2023 Anurag Srivastav v. Smt. Radhika Devi and the order dated 19.1.2023 passed by Civil Judge (S.D.)/Fast Track Court Varanasi in Original Suit No.268 of 2000 Smt. Radhika Devi v. Smt. Usha Devi, rejecting the impleadment application paper no.'99C' filed by the petitioner under Order 1, Rule 10 CPC.

    (ii) Issue an appropriate order or direction to the court below to allow the impleadment application of the petitioner and direct plaintif

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