The petitioner sought revision against an order adjourning a suit and an interim injunction application due to pending service of one defendant. Holding the date close and service incomplete, the High Court declined to interfere and dismissed the revision.
Revision petition dismissed.
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. 2082 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 20.4.2009
Kanwarjit Singh
.. Petitioner
v.
Ashwani Kumar and others
.. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Mr. H.S.Sirohi, Advocate for the petitioner.
Rajesh Bindal J.
The plaintiff has approached this Court praying for setting aside order dated 24.3.2009, whereby the case was adjourned by the learned trial court to 4.5.2009 for consideration of application for interim injunction filed by the petitioner-plaintiff and also for service of respondent No. 4.
Considering the fact that the date for which the suit as well as the application has been adjourned for consideration is quite close and one of the defendants in the suit is yet to be served, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order at this stage.
Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
20.4.2009 mk
Kanwarjit Singh
Ashwani Kumar and others
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
