In a contempt petition, the High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismissed the appeal as infructuous because the respondent had already complied with the impugned order before the hearing.
The contempt petition was 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
COPC No. 739 of 2012
Decided on: 28th May, 2013
Bhagat Ram .......Petitioner.
Versus
Tej Pal Sharma and another.
...Respondents.
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge.
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting ?1
For the petitioner : Mr. Tarlok Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. B.S. Parmar, Addl. with Mr. V.S. Chauhan, Addl. A.G with Mr. Kush Sharma, Dy. A.G.
Dev Darshan Sud, Judge (Oral)
Learned Additional Advocate General submits that order has been complied with. We placed on record office order dated 20.05.2013, reporting compliance. This fact is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner.
Notice discharged.
May 28, 2013 (Dharam Chand Chaudhary) (naveen) Judge
1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition is maintainable when the impugned order has already been complied with.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to further relief after compliance is admitted.
Bhagat Ram
Tej Pal Sharma
Dev Darshan Sud
Dharam Chand Chaudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
