A single judge orally allowed an application for early hearing of review petitions covered by a previous judgment on August 2nd, 2009, disposing them in identical terms. The order contains no substantive legal reasoning.
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
RFA No. 613 of 2007 (O&M)
Date of decision : September 10, 2009
Angrej Singh and others
Appellants
Versus
Union Territory, Chandigarh
Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR
Present : Mr. P.C. Dhiman, Advocate for the appellants
Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate for the respondent
NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL)
C.M. No. 9229-CI of 2009
C.M. is allowed with all just exceptions.
C.M. No. 9230-CI of 2009
This is an application for early hearing of the case being covered by the decision rendered in R.F.A. No. 4238 of 2006 titled as Mrs.
Avtar Sachdev and others vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh decided on 2.4.2009.
Learned counsel for the respondent confirm that the said RFA is covered by the judgment referred above.
In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the parties, the present RFA is disposed of in the same terms as R.F.A. No. 4238 of 2006 titled as Mrs. Avtar Sachdev and others vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh decided on 2.4.2009.
10.09.2009 reena
(Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Mrs. Avtar Sachdev and others vs. Union Territory, ChandigarhReferred¶16
R.F.A. No. 4238 of 2006
Angrej Singh and others
Union Territory, Chandigarh
Nirmaljit Kaur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
