Petitioner sought to withdraw a revision petition challenging dismissal of an interim injunction, citing dispossession. Court allowed withdrawal and dismissed the petition as withdrawn.
Permission to withdraw the revision petition allowed; petition dismissed as withdrawn.
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
C.R. No. 5704 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.2.2009
Bhupender Singh
... .Petitioner
Versus
Smt. Ritu Chahal and another
... Respondents
CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present:Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Ajay Kumar Kansal, Advocate for respondent No1/Caveator.
RAJESH BINDAL J
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the present petition, the petitioner has been dispossessed from the premises in dispute. In view of this development, he seeks permission to withdraw the present revision petition where the challenge is to the order passed by learned Appellate Court whereby an application filed by the petitioner for interim injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC was dismissed. He further submits that he will seeks appropriate relief in the suit field by him by amending the plaint.
Dismissed as withdrawn.
20.2.2009
(RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE
Reema
Bhupender Singh
Smt. Ritu Chahal and another
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
