Revision petition was dismissed by a single judge as having become infructuous without substantial argument or substantive decision.
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
CR No.3718 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision:24.01.2011.
Satvinder Singh and another
...Petitioners
Versus
Surinder Kumar ...Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
Present: None for the petitioners.
Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate, for the respondent.
RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL)
Learned counsel for the respondent submits that this revision
petition has become infructuous.
Dismissed as infructuous.
January 24, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE
Satvinder Singh
Surinder Kumar
Rakesh Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
