Madhya Pradesh High Court
Gouri Shanker Yadav vs M.P.Grah Nirman Mandal & Ors. Judgement ... on 8 May, 2014
S.A.No.1591/2005
08.05.2014
Shri Harshit Patel, learned counsel for the appellant.
Heard on the question of admission.
The appeal is admitted on the following substantial
question of law :
"Whether the Courts below could have decided
the dispute with regard to encroachment
without appointment of Commissioner under
Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC in view of law laid
down by the Division Bench of this Court in the
case of Durga Prasad Vs. Parveen Foujdar
and others, 1975 MPLJ 801 ?"
On payment of process fee by registered post with
acknowledgment due within a week, issue notice of this
appeal on merit along with aforesaid substantial
question of law to the respondents.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
S.A.No.279/201208.05.2014 Shri Shailendra Verma, learned counsel for the appellants, prays for adjournment in order to enable him to go through the record and argue the appeal on merit.
As prayed, let the appeal be listed after ensuing summer vacation.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
W.P.No.22125/201108.05.2014 Parties through their counsel. Heard on the question of admission. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
S.A.No.663/201108.05.2014 None for the appellant. Let the appeal be listed after ensuing summer vacation.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
W.P.No.14335/200908.05.2014 Shri P.N. Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard on the question of admission. The writ petition is admitted for hearing. On payment of process fee by registered post with acknowledgment due within a week, issue notice of this appeal on merit to respondents.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
W.P.No.7757/200908.05.2014 Shri Atulanand Awasthy, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Heard on the question of admission. The writ petition is admitted for hearing. On payment of process fee by registered post with acknowledgment due within a week, issue notice of this appeal on merit to respondents.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
W.P.No.154/200908.05.2014 Parties through their counsel. Heard on the question of admission. The writ petition is admitted for hearing. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, ad-interim order dated 27/4/2009 is hereby made absolute.
Accordingly, I.A. No.118/2009 is allowed.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
W.P.No.2086/201108.05.2014 Shri K.K. Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, prays for adjournment on the ground that arguing counsel Shri Gopi Chourasia is not available.
As prayed, let the writ petition be listed after ensuing summer vacation.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
A.A. No.36/201008.05.2014 Parties through their counsel. Shri Rajesh Maindiratta, learned counsel for the respondents, prays for respondents, prays for short adjournment in order to enable him to apprise this Court whether award has been passed by the Arbitrator.
As prayed, let the appeal be listed in the week commencing 23rd June, 2014.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
A.A. No.23/201008.05.2014 Parties through their counsel. Shri Rajesh Maindiratta, learned counsel for the respondents, prays for respondents, prays for short adjournment in order to enable him to apprise this Court whether award has been passed by the Arbitrator.
As prayed, let the appeal be listed in the week commencing 23rd June, 2014.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
A.A. No.33/201008.05.2014 Parties through their counsel. Heard on the question of admission. The appeal is admitted for hearing.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
A.A. No.29/201008.05.2014 Shri Ankit Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant. Office report indicates that notice issued to the respondent has been received unserved with a note that he was not resided on the address mentioned in the notice.
In view of aforesaid office report, learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to pay fresh process fee by registered post with acknowledgment due along with correct address to issue notice to the respondent, failing which the appeal shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
W.P. No.1655/200908.05.2014 Parties through their counsel. Heard on the question of admission. The writ petition is admitted for hearing. Shri J.K. Pillay, learned counsel for the respondents, prays for and is granted four weeks' time to file return.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
F.A. No.337/200908.05.2014 Let the first appeal be listed before the another Bench.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
F.A. No.453/200808.05.2014 Parties through their counsel. Heard on the question of admission. The appeal is admitted for hearing.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
M.A. No.196/200608.05.2014 Parties through their counsel. Let the appeal be listed along with F.A. No.453/2008.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
F.A. No.410/200708.05.2014 Shri P. Chansoria, learned counsel for the appellant. Office report indicates that respondents 2 and 12 have expired whereas notice issued to respondents 3 to 11 have been received back unserved on account of incorrect address.
In view of aforesaid office report, learned counsel for the appellant prays for and is granted four weeks' time to take requisite action.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
S.A. No.262/201308.05.2014 Shri A.D. Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant. As prayed by learned counsel for the appellant, let the appeal be listed for orders on admission after ensuing summer vacation.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
Comp.P. No.03/201208.05.2014 Shri Parag Chatruvedi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Brahmdatt Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for short adjournment in order to enable him to address this Court on the question of maintainability of the company petition.
As prayed, let the company petition be listed on 12th May, 2014.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
W.P. No.893/200808.05.2014 None for the petitioner even when the matter is taken up in the second round.
None had appeared on behalf of the petitioner on 24/3/2014.
It appears that the petitioner is not interesting in prosecuting the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
W.P. No.5869/201408.05.2014 Shri Pranay Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Let the writ petition be listed before another Bench.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
W.P. No.3297/201408.05.2014 Shri Vishal Dhagat, learned counsel for the petitioner. As prayed, let the writ petition be listed after ensuing summer vacation.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
W.P. No.1922/201408.05.2014 None for the petitioner even when the matter is taken up in the second round.
It appears that the petitioner is not interesting in prosecuting the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.
S.A. No.38 08.05.2014 Shri Mohd. Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that arguing counsel Shri P.N. Das is indispose.
As prayed, let the writ petition be listed after ensuing summer vacation.
(Alok Aradhe) Judge ts.