Years v. At- Shukla Pashu Aahar, Post - Bijuri, Alinagar, District Anuppur, Madhya Pradesh
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
In view of the above submission, the instant petition is dismissed as
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. In view of the above submission, the instant petition is dismissed as having became infructuous and stands disposed of. (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Sd/- @lfiz@
Judgment
• Smt. Sandhya Shukla W/o Shivakant Shukla Aged About 37 Years D/o Shri K. K. Tripathi, At - New Lakshmi Nagar, House No. 1348, Dawda Colony, Near Bharat Gas Agency, Pachpedi Naka, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner Versus • Shivakant Shukla S/o Shri Shivbabu Shukla Aged About 39 Years At- Shukla Pashu Aahar, Post - Bijuri, Alinagar, District Anuppur, Madhya Pradesh, Currently At - Prakash Industries, Kota Dabri, Champa, Police Station Champa, District Janjgir Champa, Chhat- tisgarh ---- Respondent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Vinay Nagdev, Advocate : Mr. Umesh Verma, Advocate For Respondent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board
22.04.2024
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the instant petition u/s 24 of the C.P.C being preferred for transfer of petition filed u/s 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been decided by the Family Court, Janjagir, District Janjagir- Champa, C.G.
Operative part
In view of the above submission, the instant petition is dismissed as having became infructuous and stands disposed of. (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Sd/- @lfiz@
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the above submission, the instant petition is dismissed as
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 24; Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — s. 9.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.