Petitioner petitioned to stay certain pages of an alleged forged sale deed in a pending suit for injunction, proposing to withdraw the suit as a subsequent declaration suit was pending. Court allowed withdrawal but reserved merit adjudication for the subsequent suit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AM UL YA
certain pages of the alleged sale deed dated 16.02.2000 (which as per the averments of the petitioner were forged) have been stayed. Learned counsel for the petitioner in this factual scenario submits that the present suit for injunction would become infructuous as the entire compass of the dispute pending in the suit for injunction has now been taken over by the subsequent suit which is a suit for declaration and which is pending as noted supra before a Bench of this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he will accordingly withdraw his suit for injunction i.e. suit No. 489/2013 titled Thakur Baiwa Singh Vs. Vijay Thakur pending in the Court of Senior Civil Judge (listed in April, 2016) on the next date. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observation on the merits of the controversy which was pending in the suit for injunction and it will be open for the parties to make their respective submissions before the Court where the subsequent suit for declaration is pending.
With these directions, petitions disposed of.
INDERMEET KAUR, J
JANUARY 14, 2016. A
Thakur Baiwa Singh
Vijay Thakur
Indermeet Kaur
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 227 of the Constitution invoking the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate civil courts.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
