The petitioner and respondent compromised. The judgment is dismissed as withdrawn under the compromise terms.
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
CRM M-2158 of 2009 Date of Decision:25.5.2011
Yogesh Malhotra
.... Petitioner
Versus
Gitika @ Anjali @ Rittu and another
.... Respondents
CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur
Present: Mr. Ramesh Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Shukla, Advocate for the respondents.
1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2.To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.(Oral)
The matter is compromised. The petitioner and respondent No.1 have got their statement recorded to the said effect.
As per the statement of respondent No.1, she wishes to
withdraw the present petition in pursuance to the compromise.
Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed as
withdrawn.
However, the parties shall be bound by the terms and conditions of the order passed in Mediation Case No.602 of 2010 on 20.4.2011 as well as the statements made before this Court.
25.5.2011 rajeev
( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) JUDGE
Yogesh Malhotra
Gitika @ Anjali @ Rittu
Nirmaljit Kaur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
