Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Bimal Chand Jain (D) Thr. Lrs. vs State Of U.P. . on 9 January, 2014

ò
CHAMBER MATTER                                                   SECTION XI




              S U P R E M E     C O U R T   O F    I N D I A
                             RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


REVIEW PETITION(C) NO.1685-1688 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2944-2947 OF
2013


BIMAL CHAND JAIN (D) THR. LRS. & ORS.                 Petitioner(s)


                   VERSUS


STATE OF U.P. & ORS.                                  Respondent(s)


(With appln.(s) for exemption from filing C/C, exemption from filing O.T.,
hearing of review petition in open Court)


Date: 09/01/2014    These Petitions were circulated today.


CORAM :
          HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR
          HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.Y. EQBAL




            By Circulation




             UPON perusing papers the Court made the following
                                 O R D E R

The application for hearing of the review petitions in the open Court is rejected.

Delay condoned.

The review petitions are dismissed in terms of the signed order.





              (Sukhbir Paul Kaur)                     (Indu Bala Kapur)

                Court Master                                   Court Master




IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (C) NOS.1685-1688 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 2944-2947 OF 2013 |BIMAL CHAND JAIN(D) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS |Petitioner(s) | Versus |STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS |Respondent(s) | O R D E R The present review petitions have been filed seeking review of the Order dated 8th April, 2013 whereby the Civil appeals filed by the appellants were dismissed.

The application for hearing of the review petitions in the open Court is rejected.

Delay condoned.

Having gone through the review petitions and the connected papers, we do not find any ground to review the aforementioned order. The review petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.

.............................J. (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR) ............................J. (M.Y. EQBAL) New Delhi, January 09, 2014.