- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Decided
- 2 February 1996
- Bench
- K. Ramaswamy, G. B. Pattanaik
- Result
- Appeal disposed of.
Headnote
Constitution of India, 1950:
Art. 136-Grant of special leave-Matters covered by an earlier decision, remitting the matter to High Court-Accordingly in tlze present matter also, order of High Cowt set aside and matter remitted to High Cowt for disposal along with pending appeals-If these appeals are already dis-posed of, the ratio therein would govern the present case.
Headnote as published in the Digital Supreme Court Reports by the Supreme Court of India. Paragraph references point to the judgment below.
Judgment
Mr. Medh, Advocate appears for respondent No. 1. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, though served, are not appearing either in person or through counsel.
Leave granted.
The controversy raised is covered by the order of this Court in C.A. 3204/95 and batch dated 28.2.1995 wherein delay was condoned and mat-ters were remitted to the High Court for disposal along with the pending appeals for decision on merits. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the High Court and remit this matter to the High Court for disposal along with the pending appeals, if not already disposed of.
. \ . . .
.
If they are disposed of, the ratio therein may gover~ the controversy in thi• appeal .
. Appeal i• di•posed of in above terms. No costs.
Case details
Arising from
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 3427 of 1996.
From the Judgment and Order dated 12.1.94 of the Rajasthan High Court in D.B.C.S.A No. 568 of 1992.
Appearances
Aruneshwar Gupta for the Appellants.
AP. Medh, Pallav Shishodia for the Respondents.
Source: Supreme Court of India, Digital Supreme Court Reports, via the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open dataset (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.