The High Court dismissed five revision petitions as infructuous following a settlement between the parties at the Lok Adalat on April 8, 2017.
Revision petitions (RC.Rev.Nos. 143/2017, 150/2017, 145/2017, 147/2017, 149/2017) dismissed as infructuous.
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
AND
5
+ RC.REV. 149/2017
MUKESH Petitioner Through: Mr.Vishal Bedi, Advocate. versus
RANJEET SINGH (THR HIS LEGAL HEIRS SHASHI) Respondent Through: Mr.Ashok Kumar, Advocate.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI npnvp % 19.04.2017
CM No.12251/2017 in RC.Rev.No.143/2017 CM No. 12266/2017 in RC.Rev.No.150/2017 CM No.12253/2017 in RC.Rev.No. 145/2017 CM No. 12260/2017 in RC.Rev.No.147/2017 CM No.12263/2017 in RC.Rev.No. 149/2017
Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Applications are disposed of.
RC.Rev.No. 143/2017 RC.Rev.No. 150/2017 RC.Rev.No. 145/2017 RC.Rev.No. 147/2017 RC.Rev.No. 149/2017
Learned counsel for the parties submit that since the parties have settled the dispute before the Lok Adalat on8111 April, 2017, these revision petitions may be dismissed for having become infructuous.
In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the revision petitions are dismissed as infructuous.
P &T I B J iiGN3rJ
APRIL 19, 2017/'st'
RC. Rev. Nos. 143, /50, 145, 147 & 149 of2017
Page 2 of 2
MUKESH
RANJEET SINGH
Pratibha Rani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
