The High Court of Chhattisgarh held a writ petition infructuous and dismissed it. The petitioner's counsel submitted that since cross-examination was permitted below, the Order 13 Rule 1(3) of CPC offers a remedy, rendering the writ petition unnecessary.
Petition dismissed as 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.
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
W.P.(227) No. 378 of 2018
Dinesh Kumar Jaiswal, S/o. Kunjram Jaiswal, Aged About 49 Years, R/o. Jora Talab Sarkanda, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
….... Petitioner
…....Respondents
| 09.05.2018 | Shri H.B.Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with Smt. Meera Jaiswal, Advocate for the Petitioner. Smt. Astha Shukla, Panel Lawyer for the State. Heard |
|---|---|
| Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cross- examination has already been permitted by the Court below. In view of this, he will avail the remedy available to the petitioner under Order 13 Rule 1 Sub Rule 3 of C.P.C. and therefore the petition has become infructuous. In view of the above submission, the instant petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. |
|
| Ashok | Sd/- Li (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be dismissed as infructuous since cross-examination has already been permitted and an alternative remedy is available under Order 13 Rule 1(3) of CPC.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dinesh Kumar Jaiswal
Agnineshwar Dey
Shipan Dey
State Of Chhattisgarh
Goutam Bhaduri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
