A revision petition under Section 126 CrPC challenging a Section 125 maintenance order was dismissed for want of prosecution as no one appeared for the applicant or non-applicants despite a second round of hearing.
The revision petition was dismissed for want of prosecution.
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.
Page 1 of 2
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRR No. 264 of 2011
Balram Das Vaishnav S/o Shri Yogeshwar Das Vaishnav, aged about 32 years, working as labour, post and R/o village Belargondi, Tahsil Churia, District Rajandgaon, Chhattisgarh. Presently residing at Minimata Nagar, Nagpur, Post Kalmana, Nagpur, Maharashtra.
---- Applicant
Versus
---Non-applicants For Applicant : None. For Non-applicants : None.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board
12.09.2022
Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge
Nimmi
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the revision petition should be allowed given the absence of the applicant despite a second round of hearing.
What order the High Court should pass when a revision petition is filed without any representation.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Balram Das Vaishnav
Smt. Saroj Vaishnav
Shikha
Rakesh Mohan Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
