U.T.Chandigarh v. Gurnam Singh
Case brief
What is this about?
This order is not substantive. It merely assigns the matter to a detailed order passed on the same day in a different reference number.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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 & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RFA No. 3948 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh
...........Appellant
Vs.
Gurnam Singh ........Respondent
CORUM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: None for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
RAJESH BINDAL J.
For orders, see detailed reasons recorded in a separate order passed today in R.F.A. No. 2016 of 2001, titled Sadhu Ram and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh.
05.10.2010 shivani
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Union Territory, Chandigarh
- respondent
Gurnam Singh
Coram
RAJESH BINDAL
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Punjab & Haryana HC
- Decided on
- · October
- Registered
- Case no.
- RFA/3948/2003
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court