w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Mansi Mathur v/s Registrar, Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, Udaipur


Company & Directors' Information:- MOHAN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70101DL2010PTC207186

Company & Directors' Information:- MOHAN MOHAN & CO PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U60200BR1951PTC000497

Company & Directors' Information:- C. LAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909HR2012PLC046499

Company & Directors' Information:- MANSI CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45203GJ2012PTC072596

Company & Directors' Information:- K MOHAN (INDIA ) PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U63090DL1987PTC027404

    Civil Writ Petition No. 3546 of 1995

    Decided On, 24 April 1996

    At, High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur Bench

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSHUMAN SINGH

    For the Appellant: R.N. Mathur, Advocate. For the Respondent: U.N. Bhandari, L.L. Jain, Naina Saraff, Advocates.



Judgment Text

1. This petition under Article 226 to the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of direction to the respondents to admit the petitioner in any of the Engineering College under the reserved category of Defence Killed or permanently disabled in action during hostilities/wars of during peace time and for quashing the decision of the respondents cancelling the candidature of the petitioner.

2. The facts as stated in the petition briefly are that the petitioner qualified All India Senior School Certificate Examination, 1995 from the Central Board of Secondary Education, and secured high grade. The respondent-University issued a Notification/ Information booklet in relation to Pre-Engineering Test (PET), 1995, a true copy of which has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. It is averred that the father of the petitioner is serving as Lt. Col. in Indian Army who has been categorised as permanent disabled. His disability is direct and proximate result of his posting in the State of Assam to meet out the insurgency operation where he was posted in between July, 1988 to December, 1990. Because of the tremendous anxiety and surrounding circumstances developed he became the patient of Non Insuline Dependant Diabetes Mellitus which, has been resulted into permanent disability. In pursuance of the notification/ advertisement issued by the respondents, petitioner submitted application form for appearing, in PET Examination, 1995. It is alleged that in the application form the petitioner specifically mentioned that her father is serving in Indian Army. It is further averred that she had submitted that her candidature may be, considered against the quota reserved for the candidates belonging to the category of 'permanently disabled Defence Personnel.' The respondent-university declared the result of PET Examination, 1995 on 12-7-1995 which was published in Hindi daily newspaper known as Rajasthan Patrika and the Roll No. allotted to the petitioner in the, said examination was 3511 and she was declared as successful in the examination and the category mentioned in the newspaper against her name was D. K. (Defence Killed). In pursuance of the notice received from the University, petitioner appeared for interview before the Interview Board on 29-7-1995. It has been further stated that the total seats reserved in the category of D. K. are "26". It has been averred in the petition that though the petitioner had been declared qualified, but at the time of interview she was informed that she cannot be given admission in any of the Engineering Colleges for the reason that he does not belongs to the category of D. K. and her father is serving in Indian Army. Thereupon, petitioner's father submitted a representation to the Vice-Chancellor and Chairman, Selection Committee PET, 1995, a true copy of which has been filed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition. Since nothing was communicated to the petitioner reminder was sent on 30-7-1995. It is further alleged that the petitioner and her father approached to the Secretary, Technical Education, Government of Rajasthan on 31-7-1995 and on 1-8-1995, but no action was taken on her request. It is alleged that the respondents have cancelled the candidature of the petitioner on the ground that the father of the petitioner is still serving in Indian Army. Petitioner feeling aggrieved against the cancellation of her candidature for being admitted in any of the Engineering Colleges of the State of Rajasthan has approached this Court in the instant petition. In view of the urgency of the facts of the case', the case was directed to listed for final disposal at the admission stage itself. The counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1 and the petitioner has also filed rejoinder affidavit to the same. In the coupler affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1, the respondent-University has stated that the petitioner does not fail within the quota reserved for the category of dependents of Defence Killed/disabled for Defence Personnel/ para military forces killed or permanently disabled in action during Hostilities/wars or during peace time. It has. further been stated that in order to get the benefit under the reserved quota as stated above, the petitioner was required to have proved that the permanent disability was caused in action during hostilities/wars or during peace time and as per the Certificate itself the father of the petitioner had been suffering from 'diabetes mellitus' disability on 24-1-1991 while serving in Jaipur. It was has been further alleged that even in the certificate it has nowhere been stated that the alleged disability was caused in action during hostilities/war or during peace time. It has been urged in para 7 of the counter affidavit that since the petitioner had filled the columns provided for defence killed or permanently disabled category (05) along with the certificate dt. 8-3-1995, hence she was shown in that category, but at the time of interview her certificate was examined and scrutinised then it was found that she was not entitled to the benefit of reserved quota. In para 8 of the counter affidavit it has been admitted that it is true that there were total 26 seats in the category of D.K. (05) but as there were only 3 candidates who had secured 33% and above marks in each paper of the PET 1995 and the petitioner was the 3rd applicant who had secured 33% and above marks in the said examination, but petitioner could not entitle to have reservation for D.K. (05) in the absence of any documentary proof for getting the benefit under the reserved quota. It is emphatically denied by the respondents that the petitioner falls within the category of D.K. (05). The respondents have further denied that the candidature of the petitioned has not been cancelled on the ground that petitioner's father is serving in Indian Army, but it has been cancelled on the ground that petitioner does not fail within the category 'claimed by her in her admission form.

3. I have heard Mr. R. N. Mathur, learned counsellor the petitioner, Mr. U. N. Bhandari, Senior Counsel for the respondent No. 1 and Mrs. Naina Saraff, counsel for the respondent No. 2 Mr. R. N. Mathul, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently urged that petitioner's father incurred permanent disability while he was posted at Assam during insurgency operation and as such, the petitioner's case was squarely covered under the reserved category reserved for Defence Personnel who have been permanently disabled during hostilities/wars or peace time. Mr. Mathur specifically invited the attention of the Court to the 'Instructions for the guidance of candidates intending to appear at the Pre-Engineering Test, 1995 issued by Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, Udaipur (Rajasthan) and specifically invited the attention of the Court to the Instruction No. 2 (c)(iii), the relevant portion of which reads as under :--

"In case of candidates belonging to the category of physically Handicapped/Children of Ex-Servicemen/ Children of Defence Personnel/Para Military Forces killed or permanently disabled in action during the hositilities/wars or during peace time, the certificate from the competent authority in proof of his/her being of that category."

4. On the basis of the said Instruction Mr. Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that for getting the benefit under the reserved category as claimed by the petitioner, it is not necessary that permanent disability should be incurred during action/ hostilities/wars or even if it is during peace time the children of Defence Personnel are entitled to the said benefit. From the perusal of the aforesaid instruction, it appears that the word "permanent disability" has not been defined and as such, the question whether the father of the petitioner was suffering from 'Diabetes Mellitus' will amount to 'Permanent Disability' or not is a mute question which has to be decided. The other question which needs the determination by this Court is whether such permanent disability was incurred while father of the petitioner was posted at Assam during peace time then, the benefit will be available to the children of Defence Personnel ? The most glaring fact of the case is that the petitioner has not filed any Certificate or document to prove the permanent disability incurred by the petitioner's father except the averments made in the writ petition, whereas, the respondents have filed a copy of the Certificate dt. 8-3-1995 issued by Mr. Subodh Kumar, Colonel Director, AFMS (Ping), New Delhi, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure R-1/2 to the writ petition, for the proper appreciation of the controversy, I consider it proper to narrate the same in extenso:--

"CHILDREN OF DISABLED ARMY

SERVICE PERSONNEL AND ARMY

EX-SERVICEMEN PENSIONERS

(By OC of the last unit served/Record Officer/DSS A & B Board)

It is certified that No. MR-3947A Rahk-Lt. Col Name--VM Mathur son of Shri ML Mathur resident village/City-Jaipur District-Jaipur State--RAJASTHAN is permanently disabled with DIABETES MELLITUS disability on 24 Jan., 1991 while serving in JAIPUR. The disability was aggravated due to Military service. The copy of Medical Board Proceedings (AFMSF-15) indicating the disability of the individual and attributability issued by ADMS HQ 61 (Indep) Sub Area on their AFMSF-15, dated 08 April, 1991 is attached.

Dated : 08-3-1995

Place : New Delhi Signature

Sd/-

Name (Subodh Kumar)

Designation Colonel

Office Seal Director

AFNS (Ping)

'M' Block

O/O DGAFS

Min. of Def.

New Delhi."

5. The said certificate clearly indicates that the same was issued on 8-3-1995 whereas, the petitioner is alleged to have been posted at Assam between July, 1988 and December, 1990. The disability is alleged to have incurred at the time of medical examination on 24th Jan., 1991 when the petitioner's father was serving in Jaipur.

6. A pointed question was posed by the Court to the learned counsel for the petitioner to refer any rule, instructions, directions or guidelines, of the Defence Department in order to determine as to what is the meaning of the words "permanent disability". Learned counsel for the petitioner expressed his inability to refer to any rule, instructions, directions or guidelines, wherein the words "permanent disability" have been defined. However, he has produced booklet/ Guide to the Medical Officers (Military Pensions) 1980. In the said booklet, in the definition Clause 7(a) the word 'disability' has been defined, but the words "Permanent disability" has not been defined. Clause 7(a) of the definition clause reads as under :

"7 (a) disability denotes solely the actual wound, injury or disease, the disablement caused by which gives rise to a claim for compensation. It is to be carefully distinguished from disablement which means physical or mental injury or damage, or loss of physical or mental capacity suffered by reason of a disability or disabilities."

7. Learned counsel for the respondents has strenuously urged that the petitioner has not produced any evidence in support of her contention that her father incurred permanent disability during peace time while he was posted at Assam. The Certificate dt. 8-5-1995 clearly indicates that the disability was detected in 195)1 while the petitioner's father was serving at Jaipur. Respondents' counsel further contended that the petitioner did not produce any certificate issued by the Commandant, Assam under whom the petitioner's father was : serving from 1988 to 1990. A perusal of copy of the report of the Medical Board shows that the disability incurred by the petitioner's father is such which is likely to improve if the disease from which the petitioner's father was suffering. Therefore, if the disability with which the petitioner's father was suffering was likely to improve, then by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that the petitioner's father has been suffering from permanent disability. If it was a case of permanent disabilit

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

y, in my opinion, the question of improvement does not arise. A perusal of the definition as mentioned in the Pension Rules shows that disability can be caused not only by wound or injury, but by disease as well. However, the question whether the disease with which the petitioner's father was suffering can be said to be the disease which can cause permanent disability? From the facts stated above, it is abundantly clear that since the petitioner was claiming the benefit of reserve category, she should have placed material on record, but she has utterly failed to produce any document to substantiate her claim. On the contrary, the respondents have falsified the claim of the petitioner by filing the documents mentioned above. 8. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the material on record. I am of the opinion that the petitioner has miserably failed to make out a case for interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and no case is made out for issuance of any mandamus directing the respondents to admit the petitioner against reserve quota. 9. In the result, the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, parties are left to bear their own costs.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

28-05-2020 Shivaraj URS Versus Union of India, Narcotic Control Bureau, Represented by Learned Special Public Prosecutor, K.N. Mohan High Court of Karnataka
21-05-2020 Aravapalli Krishna Murthy Versus Syed Lal Saheb Died & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
20-05-2020 Diwari Lal & Others Versus State of U.P. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
18-05-2020 Mohan Products Pvt. Ltd & Others Versus State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Raipur & Another High Court of Chhattisgarh
15-05-2020 Malvinder Mohan Singh Versus State & Another High Court of Delhi
14-05-2020 Meena Sharma Versus Nand Lal & Another High Court of Delhi
08-05-2020 Mohan Lal Versus State of NCT of Delhi Supreme Court of India
30-04-2020 Mohan Versus The State of Maharashtra, Through : The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
27-04-2020 Avinash Kishorchand Jaiswal & Another Versus Rammandi Deosthan, Pavnar, Wardha, through Secretary Mohan & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
24-04-2020 Paul Versus T. Mohan & Another Supreme Court of India
20-04-2020 Babu Lal Versus State (N.C.T. of Delhi) High Court of Delhi
17-04-2020 Chander Mohan Negi & Others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others Supreme Court of India
06-04-2020 Dr. Shivender Mohan Singh (In J.C.) Versus State of NCT of Delhi & Others High Court of Delhi
20-03-2020 Mohan Gupta Versus State of M.P. High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Gwailor
17-03-2020 Meghna Singh (Through: Her Natural Guardian) Avita D Lal Versus Central Board of Secondary Education & Another High Court of Delhi
17-03-2020 The Joint Labour Commissioner and Registering Officer & Another Versus Kesar Lal Supreme Court of India
17-03-2020 U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad & Another Versus Mohan Swaroop Saxena National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
11-03-2020 G. Mohan & Others Versus G. Munusamy High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-02-2020 Rakesh Mohan Gadekar Versus State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary, Home Department (Special) Mantralaya & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
27-02-2020 Manohar Lal Versus State Of Himachal Pradesh High Court of Himachal Pradesh
26-02-2020 M/s. Kiran Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. Through Director Manohar Lal Ahuja, Uttar Pradesh Versus Yashpal National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-02-2020 Natasha Kohli & Others Versus Mon Mohan Kohli & Others High Court of Delhi
20-02-2020 Rup Mohan Roy Versus Raimohan Roy High Court of Tripura
18-02-2020 M/s. Girdhari Lal Constructions (P) Ltd. Dwaraka, New Delhi, Registered Office Bhatinda, Punjab, Represented by Its Director, Vikas Mehta Versus Union of India, Represented by Its Secretary, Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs, New Delhi & Others High Court of Kerala
18-02-2020 Dr. Hira Lal Versus State of Bihar & Others Supreme Court of India
17-02-2020 Lalitha Mohan & Another Versus Pratap K. Moturi High Court of Judicature at Madras
14-02-2020 New India Assurance Company Ltd. Through Its Duly Constituted Attorney, Manager, Delhi Versus Chaman Lal National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
13-02-2020 Vikas Panchayat, Gram Boheda Through Sarpanch, Rajasthan Versus Badri Lal & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
13-02-2020 Ashok Alias Gore Lal Veruss State of U.P. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
12-02-2020 Economics Transport Organisation Ltd. Versus Mohan Investments & Properties Pvt. Ltd. & Another High Court of Delhi
11-02-2020 Kanhaiya Lal Versus Lala Ram & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
06-02-2020 Heera Lal Versus State High Court of Rajasthan
05-02-2020 Chhotey Lal @ Chottu Versus State High Court of Delhi
05-02-2020 Bontha Mohan Rao and Others. V/S Indian Overseas Bank and Others. Debts Recovery Tribunal Hyderabad
31-01-2020 Rajiv Mohan Mishra Versus CPIO Jt. Commissioner (OSD) Central Information Commission
29-01-2020 Max Bupa Health Insurance Co. Ltd. Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estate, New Delhi & Another Versus Reji Paul Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
29-01-2020 Karnveer Singh Versus Panji Lal Damor High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
28-01-2020 Mohit Lal Ghosh Versus The State of West Bengal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
27-01-2020 M/s. CNA Exports (P) Ltd. Versus Mansi Sharma & Others High Court of Delhi
24-01-2020 Chuni Lal Versus Munshi Ram & Another Supreme Court of India
24-01-2020 Lal Mohammed Versus State (Nct of Delhi) High Court of Delhi
23-01-2020 Bajrang Lal Sharma Versus C.K. Mathew & Others Supreme Court of India
22-01-2020 L. Mohan Rao Versus The Deputy Director of Tribal Welfare, I.T.D.A., Bhadrachalam, Khammam District & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
21-01-2020 Somireddy Chandra Mohan Reddy Versus State of Andhra Pradesh High Court of Andhra Pradesh
21-01-2020 E. Mohammed Misraan Versus RRB Energy Limited, Represented by The Head Operations, GA – 1/B-1 Extension, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-01-2020 Kishan Lal Chadha @ Krishan Lal Chadha (Deceased) Versus Anup Chadha High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
20-01-2020 Madan Mohan Pandey Versus Union of India High Court of Jharkhand
17-01-2020 Oriental Insurance Company Ltd, Orissa Versus Achhey Lal High Court of Chhattisgarh
16-01-2020 Rattan Lal Bharadwaj Versus Magma Financial Corporation Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
13-01-2020 Kamla A. Bharwani, (Since deceased) Through - LRs. & Others Versus Mohan D. Chulani & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
09-01-2020 K. Mohan Versus The Commissioner of Treasuries & Accounts, Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
08-01-2020 Shyam Lal Jayaswal Versus Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited & Another Supreme Court of India
07-01-2020 Minor A.S. Shriya Chithrubi & Another, Both are Represented by their Guardian & Maternal grandfather K. Natarajan, Tiruppur Versus A. Mohan & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-01-2020 Udhav Lal Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through- Police Station Sarangarh High Court of Chhattisgarh
03-01-2020 State Bank of India V/S Nand Lal Sokhal and Others. Debts Recovery Tribunal Jaipur
02-01-2020 Manori Lal & Another Versus State of U.P. & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
02-01-2020 Dr. R.T. Sababathy Mohan Versus Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance & Anti Corruption, Tirunelveli Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
30-12-2019 Vipul Mohan Joshi Versus Securities & Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan SEBI Securities amp Exchange Board of India Securities Appellate Tribunal
19-12-2019 The State of Maharashtra Versus Vijay Mohan @ Shivaji Kadam (Patil) & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
13-12-2019 Smitha Mohan, Kulathumkarott, Veliyam, Kottarakkara Versus Managing Director, Zodiac Motors, Kottarakkara & Another Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
13-12-2019 Shyam Madam Mohan Ruia & Others Versus Messer Holdings Limited & Others Supreme Court of India
12-12-2019 Vaghri Mohan Devsi Versus State of Gujarat Through & Another High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
11-12-2019 P. Rama Mohan Versus State of Andhra Pradesh High Court of Andhra Pradesh
10-12-2019 S. Mohan Versus The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
06-12-2019 Manik Lal Das Versus The State of West Bengal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
06-12-2019 Jag Mohan Versus Neelam High Court of Punjab and Haryana
04-12-2019 State of Punjab Versus Kashmiri Lal @ Sheera High Court of Punjab and Haryana
29-11-2019 Chumman Lal Sahu & Another Versus Gopal Ji Singh & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
21-11-2019 Sham Lal Chabba Versus Om Prakash & Others High Court of Himachal Pradesh
21-11-2019 N. Mohan Versus R. Madhu Supreme Court of India
20-11-2019 Mohan Kumar Versus State Bank of India, Rep. by its Manager, Pollachi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
20-11-2019 Chaitu Lal Versus State of Uttarakhand Supreme Court of India
15-11-2019 Municipal Corpn. Of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) Versus Abhilash Lal & Others Supreme Court of India
15-11-2019 The Management of M/s. Birla Te Versus Chunni Lal High Court of Delhi
14-11-2019 Mon Mohan Dutta, Shillong Versus Union of India, Through the Secretary, Ministry of Defense, Govt. of India, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
11-11-2019 The State of Maharashtra Versus Mohammed Ibrahim Lal Mohammed & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
08-11-2019 Avijit Mitra & Others Versus Shankar Lal Roy High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
08-11-2019 Parvati Mohta Through Legal Representatives Versus Mohan Lal Sukhadia University High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
05-11-2019 Heera Lal Versus State of Rajasthan, Through PP High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur Bench
04-11-2019 Shyambai Versus Shankar Lal National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
01-11-2019 Mohan Ravi Versus The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 20(5) CHE, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
25-10-2019 Joint Labour Commissioner & Registering Officer & Another Versus Kesar Lal National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
23-10-2019 Endeavour Versus Prabirendra Mohan Mitra & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
23-10-2019 Indore Development Authority Versus Manohar Lal & Others Supreme Court of India
23-10-2019 Renew Wind Energy (TN2) Private Limited, rep., by its authorized Signatory M. Madhu Mohan Rao Versus The State of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
22-10-2019 Pratap Lal Teli Versus The State of Maharashtra, through the Public Prosecutor, Home Department, Government of Maharashtra & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
19-10-2019 Hori Lal & Another Versus State of Uttar Pradesh High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
18-10-2019 Jawahar Lal Jaiswal Versus State of U.P. & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
18-10-2019 Gopi Lal Sahu Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
17-10-2019 M/s. Mohan Breweries & Distilleries Ltd., Chennai Versus The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-10-2019 Pundru Mohan Reddy Versus LIC of India & Another Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
07-10-2019 Mohan Nambiar & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra High Court of Judicature at Bombay
04-10-2019 Ravi Setia Versus Madan Lal & Others Supreme Court of India
04-10-2019 Hemant Mohan Agarwal Versus Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd. & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
01-10-2019 Radha Mohan Khandelwal Versus Rajdhani Trading Company National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
27-09-2019 Mohan Singh Versus Gurmeet Kaur High Court of Rajasthan
26-09-2019 M/s. S.P. Mani & Mohan Diary, Erode Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income tax Central Circle I, Erode High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-09-2019 Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption U.P State Cons. & Infra. Versus M/s. Reham Foundation Kandhari Lane Lal Bagh, Lucknow High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
25-09-2019 Rakesh Goel Versus Hira Lal ( Now Deceased) & Another High Court of Delhi
25-09-2019 R. Manimekalai & Others Versus C. Mohan & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras


LawyerServices is a Premium Legal Tech solution.


Lawyers, Law Firms, Government Departments and Corporates rely on us for, Workflow Automation, Data Aggregation, Timely Updates, Case Management, Intelligent Research, Latest Legal Data Updates and a LOT more!

If you are a legal professional, CONTACT US, in order to see how our UNIQUE solution can benefit your organization.

Features Intro Close Box