Madhya Pradesh High Court
RP/1144/2022 of SIRAJ KHAN Vs RAMCHANDRA (DECEASED) THROUGH LR SHRI JITENDRA on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMAON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
REVIEW PETITION No. 1144 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
1.SIRAJ KHAN S/O BAXU KHAN, AGED ABOUT 53YEARS, R/O MAKSI DIST. SHAJAPUR (MADHYAPRADESH)YEARS, R/O MAKSI DIST. SHAJAPUR (MADHYAPRADESH)2.FIROZ KHAN S/O BAXU KHAN, AGED ABOUT 43YEARS, MAKSI DISTRICT SHAJAPUR. (MADHYAPRADESH)YEARS, MAKSI DISTRICT SHAJAPUR. (MADHYAPRADESH)3.NARGISH BI S/O BANNU KHAN, AGED ABOUT 48YEARS, MAKSI DISTRICT SHAJAPUR. (MADHYAPRADESH)YEARS, MAKSI DISTRICT SHAJAPUR. (MADHYAPRADESH)
(NONE )AND1.RAMCHANDRA (DECEASED) THROUGH LR SHRIJITENDRA S/O LATE RAMCHANDRA, AGEDABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O JUNA BAZAR MAKSIPARGANA DIST. SHAJAJPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)2.MURTI SHRIKRISHNA MANDIR DEV STHANMAKSHI THROUGH LRS. VYAVASTHAPAK SH.JITENDRA S/O LATE RAMCHANDRA, AGEDABOUT 40 YEARS, JUNA BAZAR, MAKSI,PARGANA AND DISTRICT SHAJAPUR (MADHYAPRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
3.STATE OF M.P. THROUGH COLLECTOR.SHAJAPUR DISTRICT SHAJAPUR. (MADHYAPRADESH)
(NONE )
.....RESPONDENTS
following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
None for the petitioner even when the matter is taken up in the secondround.
On 22.12.2023 time was sought for by the learned counsel for thepetitioner to argue. By order dated 24.01.2024, while again granting time forargument it was made clear that no further adjournment on any groundwhatsoever shall be granted on the next date of hearing. In the first round acounsel had appeared on behalf of the petitioner who is not a counsel engagedfor by the petitioner and had sought pass over. However, in the second roundthere is no appearance on behalf of the petitioner.
Petition is hence dismissed for want of prosecution.
ns
(PRANAY VERMA)JUDGE