The Local Apex Court Bench observed that the appellants and Respondent No.7 have amicably settled the dispute. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed without admitting any substantive arguments or deciding legal questions.
The appeal was dismissed due to an amicable settlement between the appellants and the complainant.
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.
ra^i IBtlKEI
ss
tJ^^^II&IJ^
^n^ ^fT^'^^^^^
'33SET ^M'fl^ Wfffl'M'Ko •^|[4||(?f4, ^T<yl 4.<; (t?OTTO) ^c^u'g SfTf^ •rp^ Igi /2005
raff yRi4i^
raff ^r-TTaT ST^, 80 Wcf, SfFO^TETcRTfT ^r.ft yRi4i^ f^T-Rldl^^' (^O^TO) - (^T) 1. Ru<^ ^PTR 'rff'ft 'S^ 53 ^ f^TT •aft VT-TTST ^fMt s -=XO^-l-lJI-' ^t 1. -rfr^ TTu^ ^"•ft ./~\ ftrETcTT cTS+Tl'll'iM"! ^Tl'^ft ^f kl^ ^f t.A^ .~y "^S 50 ^f ^t^:'^'/J^ R 'cgW? ^fl-^ft <-',>^/^ •t YW'" , y^:^y^ 3TT. ^. cr?lft ^TRRiTT teibs"' •-""""^.^^y^ ..-••••' ^""^^.^('^^"^ ^g 25 'ET< cTT^ '^^Tf ftcTRft <l^4ll4l(?1 ^^t ^T^. 'yi^
J\n^
f^TcTT fsTrfl^^ C??-Tr-)
^PTRm^r T c1S<fle1 y'llcTl T-ftc;fRiy(??0'TTO)
f^-g
<<^^b
^3TCR^t-7TTIT 1. . 3TN? T5T STT^ ^Nt ? yfaciic?|-i|"i srrg 52 w?r 2. ^RTar^fr srrg 46 .s^ w^sw ^Nt STT^ 37 ^TTcT 4. y'hql^^ 3fT?:fuT ^FT'naT ^('•¥r STTg 37 ^Tc;T 5. ul^itTl^l. HW^ 3TR»M ^PT'nST 1^Nt CJ STTg 47 'crf ^ 6. ^IMI-fl 5^1 ^FFTTST ^Nt STT^, 54 WcT ; 7. •'TCTUT ?pTR 3rTtTM ^n^fTaT ^TT'ft STTg 47 ^TM ^Pft p|c||\fl —'Hlriiqi'il, dS'rilcl— iTRTORT, fuT?TT—f^cTRTq^ (??07TO) 8. . Wn'll^^Ku '?TTFT;T
^T?T- f&rarezrsT, Rc'ii'i-i^
..2..
.ft.1'^''
'"^y^&T^T':^
^'^.If:'-^^
^l^^^.y^^ld.'^T^ ^°% ST^M
sfficTfsfl ^mi
^,
l^ab
@^lt^l
^.^^ ...•--"'"" c,.c^c^p
^Tcfl- IT^ -^^1 f^ET?r"cr&4l'it<ii^"i •^rMt
^SV 50 ^
-WTtft ^rf^S ^VTK 31T. •?cr. cTS'ft ^\imu\
*3~ff 25 ?Ef
^ff ftciltft '(M'ltMlc) RTcTTft ^T^ yt-^i ?r?. ^cft fSrar Rdi^^ (BF.^T.)
SIPj .^••.tt'^ ';.^; ^fTSPTRT,] ^•'s;,;'.'^ ^'•^^^mf
^ ^
3's? '^ww-i, s^v'ie, Kiv/>wy,
•^ WTW %T)NT ............£A^.d-J.lY/^ 2(1
| sn^?r WSK ( |
||
|---|---|---|
| ail^!WWi* •S'WS-S^WV |
^giWfl^dan^i | '^Ttff^^f't HIH^ "^'fet^ <f^^T< ^ajfgiisn^r |
| L< | !»K-ADALAT | |
| 1,9,2012 ShriA.K. Gupta, couil ShriQaiiirulAziz, Pa AppeUant - VIjay ^ ShravanKumarare alsopr parq Leamed counsel for jointly submitted fhat outside the Court and in donotwlshtopresstheap t Inview Qfthe submi^ aswithdrawn. |
^sel for fhe appellants. ^ielLawyerforfheState. iumar Soiii and respondent No.7- ^senfc es ^eal hat fhe appellants and respondent Np.7 have amicably settl«itheirdispute view ofthe matter, fhe appeUants sion so made, fhe appealis disnaissed |
|
| Let decree be drawnl appeUantsuponproductio^ |
Court fee shaU be refunded to fhe ofpropercertlficate. |
|
| Sd/- (JusticeMaBindra MoSaaShrjvastava) Membsr LokAdalat High Court BILASPUR iC.Q' |
Sd/- ^"3>BiiS^%s;;h |
VIJAY
SHRAVAN KUMAR
STATE
BILAS
VIJAY
SHRAVAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
