Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

J.B. TIWARI versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


J.B. Tiwari v. State Of U.P. - CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. 1640 of 1995 [2004] RD-AH 878 (23 September 2004)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 48

Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No. 1640 pf 1995

Jang Bahadur Tiwari                                     ........Petitioner/Applicant.

Versus

State of U.P. Through Secretary,

Revenue Board, Lucknow and

another.                                                         ..........Opp. Parties.

*******

Hon'ble S.P.Mehrotra, J.

The present Contempt Petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, inter-alia, praying for summoning the Opposite Parties and 1994 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. Nil of 1994.

The Contempt Petition was listed before the Court on 17th September, 2004. On the said date, i.e. on 17th September 2004, Sri H.N. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner-applicant had sent illness slip, and, therefore, the case was passed over and was directed to be listed peremptorily in the next cause list.

Pursuant to the said order dated 17th September 2004, the case is listed today, peremptorily.

Sri H.N. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner-applicant has again sent illness slip today. However, as the case is listed peremptorily today, the case is being taken up and the appropriate order is being passed.

The present Contempt Petition was filed on 18th October, 1995.

By the order dated 19th October, 1995, the Contempt Petition was directed to be listed in the week commencing 30th November, 1995. The said order dated 19th October, 1995 is as under :

"List this matter in the week commencing 30th November, 1995."

A perusal of the order-sheet shows that pursuant to the said order dated 19th October, 1995, the case was put up before the Court for admissioin with the office report dated 27th November, 1995. However, no order appears to have been passed on the said date.

The case was, thereafter, listed before the Court on 17th September, 2004, when the order, as mentioned above, was passed.

It is thus evident that no order has so far been passed on the Contempt Petition directing for issuance of notices  to the Opposite Parties; as such, no notice has so far been issued to any of the Opposite Parties.

In the circumstances, I am of the opinion that no  useful purpose will be served by directing for issuance of notices to the Opposite Parties now after a lapse of about 9 years since the filing of the Contempt Petition in October, 1995.

The Contempt Petition has evidently become infructuous, and the same is liable to be dismissed as such.

The Contempt Petition is, accordingly, dismissed as having become infructuous.

Dt.23-9-2004/AK/L


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.