In an interim order, the single Judge allowed the applicant to withdraw the revision, and the matter was dismissed accordingly.
Permission to withdraw the revision granted; revision dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRR No. 500 of 2015
---- Applicant
Versus
---- Respondents
| 01/12/2015 Shri Shivendu Pandya counsel for the applicant. Shri Sourabh Dangi counsel for the respondents. |
|---|
| At the outset, counsel for the applicant submits that he wants to withdraw this revision. |
| Revision is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. |
| Sd/- |
| (Pritinker Diwaker) |
| Judge |
Jyotishi
Khomeandra Bharatdwaj S/O Manohar Bharatdwaj
Smt. Kriti Bharatdwaj
Pushpendra (Rajat) Bharatdwaj
Pritinker Diwaker
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
