In this civil revision petition, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the plea as infructuous after the petitioner conceded that the main suit had already been decided by the trial court, rendering the revision superfluous.
The petition was dismissed as infructuous.
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.
Civil Revision No.4218 of 2003(O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No.4218 of 2003(O&M) Decided on : 18-08-2009
Dera Ram Dayal
.... Petitioner
VERSUS
Kartar Dass
.... Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL.
Present:Mr. H.S. Deol, Advocate, for Ms. Rajni Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.
None for the respondent.
SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J (ORAL)
The petitioner (plaintiff) has filed the instant revision petition against order dated 28.7.2003 (Annexure P-7) passed by the Additional District Judge, Moga, whereby the order of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Moga, dated 15.4.2003, which was passed in favour of the petitioner, was set aside.
In the suit for permanent injunction; an application was filed by the petitioner under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 C.P.C., which was allowed and the respondent (defendant) was temporarily restrained from interfering in the lawful and peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit land except in due course of law. Against the said order, appeal filed by the
Civil Revision No.4218 of 2003(O&M)
-2-
respondent/defendant, was allowed by the Additional District Judge, Moga vide order dated 28.7.2003, while setting aside the the order of the Trial Court.
In this petition, while issuing notice of motion on 11.9.2003, the operation of the impugned order dated 28.7.2003 (Annexure P-7) was stayed.
Counsel for the petitioner states that since the main suit has been decided by the Trial Court, as such, this petition has become infructuous.
Dismissed as infructuous.
18th August, 2009. (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) Monika JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the civil revision petition stands dismissed as infructuous because the main suit was already decided by the trial court.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Dera Ram Dayal
Kartar Dass
SATISH KUMAR MITTAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
