SHAILESH JAIN v. MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN
Court: High Court of Manipur
Bench: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KH NOBIN SINGH
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Manipur judgment dated 2020-12-14. SHAILESH JAIN v. MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL (Video Conference) Cril Rev. Petn. No. 8 of 2017 Mahendra Kumar Jain …Petitioner(s) Vs. State of Manipur …Respondent(s) With CRP(CRP ART. 227) No. 17 of 2018; CRP(CRP ART. 227) No. 7 of 2018; M. C. (CRP(CRP ART. 227) No. 19 of 2018; M. C. (CRP(CRP ART. 227) No. 9 of 2018; W. P. (C) No. 451 of 2017 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KH. NOBIN SINGH O R D E R 14-12-2020 Cril. Rev. Petn. No. 8 of 2017: This Cril. Rev. Petn. is filed by the petitioner against the order dated 19-06-2017 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Lamphel, Imphal West in Cril. Misc. Case No. 17 of 2017. The said Cril. Rev. Petn. No. 8 of 2017 has been pending since the year 2017. Two counter affidavits have been filed – one, on behalf on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 and two, on behalf of the respondent No. 1. When the matter is taken up for consideration, none is present for the petitioner.
It may be noted that on 26-11-2020, when the matters were taken up for consideration including this Cril. Rev. Petn. , no one was present for the petitioner but Shri P. Tomcha, learned Advocate who was present, submitted that he was no longer the counsel appearing for the petitioner. In view of the above, Cril Rev. Petn. No. 8 of 2017 stands dismissed for non-prosecution. Shri Athouba Khaidem, learned Government Advocate appears for the State respondents and Shri T. Rajendra, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4. Interim order, if any, granted by this court stands vacated. CRP (CRP ART. 227) No. 17 of 2018 With CRP (CRP ART. 227) No. 7 of 2018 Heard Shri T. Rajendra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1, 2 and 3 in CRP (CRP ART. 227) No. 17 of 2018 and respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 in CRP (CRP ART. 227) No. 7 of 2018 and none is present for the petitioner. It has been submitted by Shri T.
Rajendra, learned counsel appearing for the said respondents that the above two CRPs have arisen out of the O. S. No. 16 of 2017which was pending before the Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Imphal West – I. The said suit being O. S. No. 16 of 2017 has been disposed of by the Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Imphal West-I vide its order dated 20-11-2019 and in view thereof, these two CRPs have become infructuous and are accordingly, dismissed as infructuous. Interim order, if any, granted by this court stands vacated. M. C. (CRP(CRP Art. 227) No. 19 of 2018 with M. C. (CRP(CRP ART. 227) No. 9 of 2018 In view of the order passed by this court disposing of the said two CRPs, no order is required to be passed in these two applications and accordingly, the misc. cases stands disposed of. W. P. (C) No. 451 of 2017: This is a writ petition filed by the petitioner questioning the letter written by the Deputy Commissioner to the Sub-Divisional Officer.
It has been submitted by Shri Niranjan Sanasam, learned Government Advocate that on receipt of the said letter by the SDO, Lamphel, a Cril. Case was registered. None is present for the petitioner to rebut it. In view of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of as infructuous. Copies of this order shall be sent to the learned counsels appearing for the parties through their WhatsApp/e-mail. JUDGE Devananda Digitally signed Yumkh by Yumkham Rother am Date: 2020. 12. 14 Rother 14:47:54 +05'30'
Source: High Court of Manipur. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.