SMT. NISHA BHARGAVA v. SMT. VIMLA BAI
Court: High Court of Madhya Pradesh
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 2024-01-11. SMT. NISHA BHARGAVA v. SMT. VIMLA BAI. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR-IV th ON THE 11 OF JANUARY, 2024 MISC. PETITION No. 2101 of 2018 BETWEEN:- SMT. NISHA BHARGAVA W/O SHRI RAMKUMAR BHARGAVA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE, R/O LATERI, MOHALLAH, NEAR BHINDA TEHSIL LATERI DISTRICT VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH) ..... PETITIONER (SHRI PAWAN DEWNANI - ADVOCATE ) AND 1) SMT. VIMLA BAI D/O SHIVCHARANLAL, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE, R/O VILLAGE GALAKHEDA TEHSIL LATERI, VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH) 2) SMT.
RAMSHREE BAI D/O SHIVCHARANLAL, D/O LATE SHRI PREMNARAYAN, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE, R/O VILLAGE KACHIKHEDA, TEHSIL LATERI DISTRICT VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH) 3) LADO BAI D/O SHIVCHARANLAL, W/O BAMARLAL, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE, R/O VILLAGE JAMNER, AT PRESENT VILLAGE ANANDPUR, TEHSIL LATERI DISTRICT VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH) 4) SALAKRAM S/O SHRI SHIVCHARAN LAL, AGE 70 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE ANANDPUR, TEHSIL LATERI, DISTRICT VIDISHA 5) MADANMOHAN S/O SHIVCHARAN LAL, AGE 60 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE ANANDPUR, TEHSIL LATARI DISTRICT VIDISHA 6) GOVARDHAN S/O BRIJMOHAN, AGE 50 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE ANANDPUR, TEHSIL LATARI, DISTRICT VIDISHA 7) GUDDI BAI D/O BRIJMOHAN, WD/O MUNNU, AGED 45 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE ANANDPUR, Signature Not Verified Signed by: ROHIT SHARMA Signing time: 11-01-2024 05:29:25 PM TEHSIL LATARI, DISTRICT VIDISHA 8) PUSPA BAI, D/O BRIJMOHAN, WD/O OMPRAKASH, AGED 40 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE ANANDPUR, TEHSIL LATARI, DISTRICT VIDISHA 9) SHIPRABAI D/O BRIJMOHAN, W/O ASHOK, AGED 35 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE ANANDPUR, TEHSIL LATARI, DISTRICT VIDISHA 10) RAJESHBABU S/O SHRI SALAKRAM, AGED 35 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE ANANDPUR, TEHSIL LATARI, DISTRICT VIDISHA 11) STATE OF M.
P. THROUGH COLLECTOR, DISTRICT VIDISHA ..... RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI G. K. AGRAWAL - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) This petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the following: ORDER Learned counsel for petitioner submits that he has no instructions from his client but from enquiry made from E-Court Services, it appears that case has already been disposed of and judgment has been passed. It appears that plaintiff has no interest in pursuing the petition that is why he has not contacted his client. In view of the above, petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, if any interest of petitioner still survives, he is at liberty to move an application for recalling the order. (RAJENDRA KUMAR-IV) JUDGE Rohit Signature Not Verified Signed by: ROHIT SHARMA Signing time: 11-01-2024 05:29:25 PM
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.