The petition sought to set aside an injunction preventing the respondents from filing a counter claim; the court dismissed the petition as having no merit.
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 and Haryana at Chandigarh
Civil Revision No. 1378 of 2008
Date of decision: May 18, 2009
Mohan Lal and others
.. Petitioners
Vs.
Faiz Mohd. and others
.. Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal
Present: Mr. Ashok Khubbnar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. C.B. Goel, Advocate for the respondents No.1, 3, 4 & 5. Mr. A.K. Takkar, Advocate for the respondents No.6 & 7.
A.N. Jindal, J
The question whether the defendants/respondents were dispossessed during the pendency of the suit by the plaintiffs is a matter to be decided during trial after receiving evidence of both the parties on merits. The order of injunction cannot be treated as a conclusive evidence to determine the possession. As such, that cannot work as obstacle or embargo for filing a counter claim by the defendants.
Resultantly, finding no merit in the petition the same is dismissed.
May 18, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge
Mohan Lal and others
Faiz Mohd. and others
A.N. Jindal
deepak Judge
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
