Petitioner claimed relief was already granted, rendering the petition infructuous; court viewed disposition accordingly. Decision was procedural with no substantive legal analysis.
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 PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Date of decision : October 16, 2006
Ramanpreet Kaur ............Petitioner
Vs.
State of Punjab & others ...........Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S BHALLA
Present: Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Sukhdip Singh Brar, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Ashish Rawal, Advocate for respondent no.2. Mr. D.S Patwalia, Advocate for respondent no.3.
Viney Mittal, J. (Oral)
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner says that the requisite relief has been granted to the petitioner, and therefore, the present petition has been rendered infructuous.
Disposed of accordingly.
( VINEY MITTAL ) JUDGE
October 16, 2006 ( H.S BHALLA ) ritu JUDGE
Ramanpreet Kaur
State of Punjab
Viney Mittal
H.S Bhalla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
