The court held the execution petition infructuous as prior directions were complied with. Pending applications were also disposed of. No substantive relief was granted as the petition lacked independent merit.
Petition disposed as infructuous; pending applications disposed of.
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
Execution Petition No. 84 of 2017 Date of Decision: 13.09.2017
____ Jagat Ram Rana …..Petitioner. Versus Himachal Pradesh Horticultural Products Marketing & Processing Corporation Limited and Anr. ....Respondents.
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge . Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Petitioner: Mr. M.L. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. P.D. Nanda, Advocate.
Sanjay Karol, ACJ. (oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that directions contained in judgment dated 11.7.2014, passed in CWP No. 4869 of 2014 titled as “Jagat Ram Rana v. HPMC and Anr.”, stand complied with in its letter and spirit.
( Sanjay Karol), Acting Chief Justice
13th September, 2017 ( Sandeep Sharma ), Manjit Judge.
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
Jagat Ram Rana
Himachal Pradesh Horticultural Products Marketing & Processing Corporation Limited
Sanjay Karol
Sandeep Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
