A writ petition challenging an order dismissing an interim injunction application. The court avoided deciding on merits and instead directed the trial court to conclude the pending trial expeditiously by 30 April 2020.
Direction to the Civil Judge to conclude the trial expeditiously on or before 30 April 2020
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.
CMPMO No. 298 of 2015 Date of decision: 07.11.2019
Salig Ram Verma & Another
Versus
Khem Chand & Others
.…Respondents
Coram :
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner : Mr. Peeyush Verma, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Romesh Verma, Advocate.
Sandeep Sharma, Judge. (Oral)
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order dated 18.09.2014 passed by learned District Judge, Shimla in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.11-S/14 of 2014 modifying the order dated 4.4.2014 passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr.Divn.) Court No.VI, Shimla, whereby application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of Code of Civil Procedure having been filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs was dismissed, plaintiff has approached this Court by way of present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying therein to set aside the impugned order dated 18.09.2014 and allow the application filed by him under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of Code of Civil Procedure.
1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(Sandeep Sharma),
Judge November 7, 2019 (ravinder)
Salig Ram Verma
Khem Chand
Sandeep Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
