Single-judge court dismissed a writ petition by the petitioner regarding a stale claim from 1990, holding it barred by laches and refusing to entertain it on merits.
Petition dismissed as barred by laches; no aid to the petitioner.
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.
®@
#xw
Singm gemh
IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT
BILASPUR lC.G.l
w. P. (s: No. 222$Cfbf 2012
PETITIONER : Gopal Tiwari S/o Late Lakhan La] Tiwari, gi§r7/{Z» aged about 62 wfCS) .‘ Dumartalab years, R/o zsmMahobabazar, 4Cz Raipur .d” (C.G.) mmeWsma;[;g2F \5 ............ M¢....... W RESPONDENTS :1. AHahabad Bank, through its 4k Chalrman and Managmg Dlrector, 2 NS. Road Kolkata~7000Ol ”The 2. Assistant General Manager, Allahabad Bank, Zonal Office, Raipur (C.G.) “(Branch 3. Manager, Allahabad Bank, Branch Kumharl, Durg (C.G.)
_WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA \
" S“? .. La. .0.PCS;..N:.:...%%..§T7 //1 W m vi 20
mm (W)
| am anfm | mamm‘ | Wm f§€tW %a1'f%maxr%¥t |
|---|---|---|
| -‘ ‘ ’ |
sB : Hon’ble ski-1 ManindraMo 4.9.2012 ‘ Shri Goutam Khatrapal, co Heard. Learned counsel for the pe $ed by the petitioner in the ye " a? butwith liberty to me proper rejecting representation shows dismissal ofthe case on merits. It appears that the petitio with regaxd to a stale ciaim, for back in year 1990. Therefoxe, this petition even though the a dismissal of the petition was not with liberty to tile hesh petition. stale; this Court is not inclined aid ofthe petiu’oner. The petition is therefore di |
m Shrimtava, J. unsel for the petitioner. u‘tioner submits that the writ petition 1990 was not dismissed on merits, constituted petiiion, but the order that the same is being treated as er has sought to invoke jurisdiction hich, he had med a writ petition way _ 's Court is not inclined to entertain uthority may have ignored that the on merits, but on technical ground, However, because of the clam'i being to entertain the petition and come to smissed as barred by lachcs. Sdl- Manindra Mohan Shriv Judge aStaVa |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition regarding a stale claim from 1990 should be entertained as dismissed on merits or barred by laches.
Gopal Tiwari
Allahabad Bank
Shrimtava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
