Vinod Kumar v. Satish Chand
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court dismissed Petitioner's Writ petition in default as no one appeared on his behalf to argue the case during the hearing.
What the court decided
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:47176
Court No. - 20
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1000011 of 1997
Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Respondent :- Satish Chand Counsel for Petitioner :- Hari Om Singh,Samarth Saxena,Shafiq Mirza,Shishir Chandra,Upendra Kumar,Vishnu Pratap Singh,Vishwesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Avadesh Kumar,Dhruv Mathur,Dr.L.P.Mishra,I.D.Shukla,Ishwar Dutt Shukla,S K.Mehrotra,Santosh Kumar Mehrotra,Sushil Kumar Rastogi
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
List has been revised.
No one appears on behalf of the petitioner, while learned counsel for opposite party no.3 is present.
The petition is, accordingly, dismissed in default.
Order Date :- 19.7.2023 Arnima
Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Vinod Kumar
- respondent
Satish Chand
Coram
Manish Mathur
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · July
- Registered
- Case no.
- WRIA/1000011/1997
All orders in this case
2 orders share this CNR
- Order 1 — this page · Manish Mathur
- Order 2 · Pankaj Bhatia
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Ramesh Agarwal Vs Goklendra Bahadur Singh and Others
Bhanu Pratap Tiwari Vs the Court of Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Pratapgarh and 2 Others
Indrasen and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 2 Others
Sri Alok Upadhyay Vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court, U.P., Lko. and Another