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

2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 23867

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
Dinesh Kumar Pandey – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates:
Prakash Braru,Advocate General

ORDER

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that due to inadvertence, respondent No.2 has been referred as Superintendent of Police District Morena whereas correct parties is Collector, District Gwalior. He seeks permission of this Court to amend the cause title accordingly.

2 . Looking to the nature of prayer, in the interest of justice, prayer is allowed and learned counsel for petitioner is permitted to amend the cause title across the Board.

3 . After amendment being carried out, matter is heard finally with consent.

4 . The present petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking following reliefs:-

    (i) That, the respondent no 2 may kindly be directed to relies the refundable court fee amount as instructed by the Court without any delay within stipulated time period to the petitioner back account.
    (ii) A further direction may kindly be issued to the respondent no 2 to release the interest on the payable amount @ 18% per annum till the last dated of payment.
    (iii) That any other relief to which this Hon'ble court may deem fit may also directed to extended in favour of the petitioner in the interest of justice.
    (iv) Costs of this pe

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