Dismissed
Inder Pal v. Suresh Kumar
Uttarakhand HCWPMS/726/2015
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
Writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution after counsel stated he had no instructions from the petitioner; interim order, if any, vacated.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
| SL. No Date |
Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS |
|---|---|---|
| WPMS No.726 of 2015 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Sachin, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. J.C. Karnataka, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Pitambar Singh, learned counsel holding brief |
||
| of Mr. Tapan Singh, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has got no instructions from the petitioner in the matter. 4. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. 5. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. |
||
| (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 10.09.2025 AK |
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- petitioner
WPMS No.726 of 2015 petitioner
- respondent
respondent
Coram
AI extract
Pankaj Purohit
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Uttarakhand HC
- Decided on
- · September
- Registered
- Case no.
- WPMS/726/2015
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court