The Court dismissed the appeal as infructuous, noting that more than seven years had passed since the dispute originated, rendering the controversy to be upheld.
Appeal dismissed as having become infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 34
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 1550 of 2011
Appellant :- State Of U.P. And Others Respondent :- Jagdish Prasad Pathak And Others Counsel for Appellant :- S.C. Counsel for Respondent :- Irfan Ahmad
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Order Date :- 12.12.2017 IrfanUddin
State Of U.P.
Jagdish Prasad Pathak
Sudhir Agarwal
Ajit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
