Dismissed
Ashok Kumar v. Venu Bakshi
Himachal Pradesh HCCS/39/1998
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
1998. 08.12.2010 Present: Mr. R.L. Sood…
What the court decided
AI extract
1998. 08.12.2010 Present: Mr. R.L. Sood…
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.
C.S. No.39 of 1998.
08.12.2010
Present:
Mr. R.L. Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate for the plaintiff.
Mr. Bhupender Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Janesh Gupta, Advocate for the defendants.
OMP No.551 of 2010.
Heard. Allowed.
C.S. No.39 of 1998.
The parties have filed a joint application under
Order 23 Rule 3 CPC. Same is allowed.
In view of the statements of plaintiff and defendant, recorded today separately, the matter stands compromised as per the terms contained in Ex. ‘X’.
Accordingly, the suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant, as compromised, in terms of Ex. ‘X. Decree sheet be prepared. Ex. ‘X’ shall form integral part of the decree. The pending OMP, if any, also stands disposed of.
(Rajiv Sharma), J.
December 08, 2010. (sck).
1 provisions across 1 enactments
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court