Birju Kumbhkar v. Dr. S.K.Pandey, The Dirgctor, Veterinaiy Services
Case at a glance
Outcome
Withdrawn
petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Provisions considered
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 s. 12
- Constitution of India art. 215
Judgment
Birju Kumbhkar S/o LaTe Shri Kejurain Kumbhkar, aged about 64 years, Retired Driver, R/o Imlibhatha, Near Samudayik Nagar, Bhawan, P.S.-Sarkanda, Sarkanda, 8s District- Bilaspur, Tahsil Bilaspur (C.G.) Arvind VERSUS RESPONDENTS
Dr. S.K.Pandey, The Dirgctor, Veterinaiy Services Chhattisgarh, Near Mahasamund Taxi Stand, G.E. Road, Raipur, Police Station & District-Raipur (C.G.) .
Dr. K.K. Dhmw, The Joint Director, Veterinary Services, Composite Building, Bilaspur, Station-Civil Line, Bilaspur, Disfa-ict-Bilaspur (C.G.) Police ^o'_^-c_''_ _„__ - CONTEMPT PETITION UNDER SECTION 12 OF CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT 1971 READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA t 'S'ST -<ji<iiyq, ®Til<-i'i<o, f«<ciiyy,< WHCTTaiW^ Q.^:.Cs^S>.Hf.:.2^ g, SII^TT^? (ljclf-i«l<iiEI) tsf^t w R-ii* ^H 3TT^fT ai+ii<ft TOITWaft'itSII^I S.B: HON'Bl-E MR.JUSTICE N.K. 25.06.2013: <hNi<'l<ftl TTTR^ ^T 'fe^t ^sifin aii^i <Ht|^l<. Shri Prateek Sharma, cou(isel forthe petitioner. Shri Pawan Kesharwani, (jounsel forttie respondents. Counsel for the responc|ents submits that vfcle order dated
Operative part
22.03.2013, representation pr4< r^ferred by the petitioner has been decided. Copy of the order dated 2{ 2P.03.2013 fil«lby the respondents be kept on record. !n view ofabove, counsell tt^s court to withdraw this remedy whatever is available |for the petitioner seeks permission of cont|ampt petition with iiberty to avail the jto the petitioner under the relevant provisionsof law. • 'Permisslon granted. Accordingly, the contem()t petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the above stated liberty. Nd order as to costs. Sd/- N.K.AgrawaI Judge D/-
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — s. 12; Constitution of India — art. 215.
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.