Appeal allowed by reference to reasons recorded in a separate order of the same date, resulting in disposal of the matter in identical terms to that separate order.
Disposal of present appeal in same terms as R.F.A. No. 5386 of 2001.
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
R.F.A. No. 128 of 2002 (O&M)
Sh. Inder Singh
....... Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana And Another
...... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Anjum Ahmed, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana
RAJESH BINDAL J.
In view of the detailed reasons recorded in a separate order of even date passed in R.F.A. No. 5386 of 2001 – State of Haryana And Another Versus Mukandi Lal And Others the
present appeal is disposed of in same terms.
18.03.2010
sarita
(RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.F.A. No. 5386 of 2001 – State of Haryana And Another Versus Mukandi Lal And OthersFollowed¶12
Sh. Inder Singh
State of Haryana
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
