The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the appeal relying on the detailed reasons recorded in a separate, contemporaneous order (R.F.A. No. 5737 of 2001).
The appeal is dismissed.
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. 2203 of 2002 (O&M)
State of Haryana and another
....... Appellants
Versus
Sham Sunder
...... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Mr. H.S. Hooda, Advocate General, Haryana with Mr. Ashish. Gupta, Asstt. Advocate General, Haryana.
None for the land owner.
RAJESH BINDAL J.
In view of the detailed reasons recorded in a separate order of even date passed in R.F.A. No. 5737 of 2001 Harbhajan Singh and others Versus State of Haryana and another the present appeal is dismissed.
(RAJESH BINDAL) 04.08.2010 JUDGE sarita
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Harbhajan Singh and others Versus State of Haryana and anotherReferred¶12
R.F.A. No. 5737 of 2001 Harbhajan Singh and others Versus State of Haryana and another
State of Haryana and another
Sham Sunder
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
