Dismissed¶17

Raghbir Singh v. Bohra Ram

Himachal Pradesh HC2 Sept 2024RSA/124/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Himachal Pradesh High Court; RSA No.124 /2020; Raghbir Singh v. Bohra Ram; decided 02.09.2024; Judge: Bipin Chander Negi (oral); possession of suit land not proved by plaintiff; permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction refused by both Courts below; no substantial question of law; appeal and pending miscellaneous applications dismissed; advocates: Vikram Thakur (appellant), Atharv Sharma (respondent).

What did the court decide?

On perusal of the record, there exists no infirmity in the finding returned by the Courts below that the appellant/plaintiff is not in possession of the suit land. ¶12

Raghbir Singh Vs Bohra Ram — Himachal Pradesh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2024:HHC:7797

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

RSA No.124 /2020. Date of Decision: 02^nd September, 2024.

¶4

Raghbir Singh	Versus	.....Appellant.
Bohra Ram		…..Respondent.
Coram

¶5

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge.

¶6

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶7

For the Appellant: Mr. Vikram Thakur, Advocate.

¶8

For the Respondent: Mr. Atharv Sharma, Advocate.

¶9

Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral).

¶10

Suit, in the case at hand, was filed by the plaintiff i.e. present appellant. The same had been filed for permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction. Both the Courts below have returned categoric finding that the present appellant/plaintiff before the trial Court has failed to prove possession qua the suit land.

¶11

2. In view thereof, both the Courts have declined grant of relief of permanent prohibitory injunction and a mandatory injunction, as is being sought by the present appellant.

¶12

3. Perused the record, there exists no infirmity in the finding returned qua the appellant/plaintiff being not in possession of the suit land.

¶13

¶14

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? YES

¶15

¶16

¶17

4. In view of the aforesaid, no substantial questions of law may arise out in the present appeal. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed so also the pending

¶18

miscellaneous application(s), if any.

¶19

(Bipin Chander Negi) Judge

¶20

2^nd September, 2024 (Gaurav Rawat)

Raghbir Singh v. Bohra Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghbir Singh v. Bohra Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others

Devpal Singh Vs State of Hp and Others

Vijay and Others Vs State of Hp and Another

The Principal Secretary Revenue Vs Manohar Lal

Mangal Singh Vs Hpsebl and Others

Kultar Singh Vs State of Hp and Others