CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Suresh Kumar vs Dhirendra Kumar Jain

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 5 April 2013 · Citation: (2013) 3 WLN 23

HON’BLE JUDGES
Arun Bhansali, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 1 Rule 10
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil First Appeal No. 100 of 2001
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 174 words

Arun Bhansali, J.—An application has been filed by the appellant supported by an affidavit seeking withdrawal of the appeal. The said application is not opposed by the respondents. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 100/2001 is dismissed as withdrawn.

2.

Another prayer has been made in the application seeking refund of the Court-fee in view of the fact that the appeal is being withdrawn.

3.

The appellant has paid Court-fee of Rs. 19,665/-. In view of the provisions of Section 65B of the Rajasthan Court-fees & Suits Valuation Act, 1961, the prayer is accepted. A certificate be issued to the appellant authorising him to receive back from the Collector, full amount of the fee paid in respect of fee.

4.

During the pendency of the appeal, another application being I.A. No. 1642/2013 has been filed under Order I, Rule 10 CPC seeking impleadment. In view of the withdrawal, the said application is rendered infructuous and the same is also dismissed as having become infructuous.