Civil revision challenging orders granting ad-interim injunction. The High Court reviewed prior revisions and found no grounds to interfere, dismissing the present revision.
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.
Civil Revision No. 3929 of 2010 Date of decision:- 15.03.2011
Samadhan Jogian Dudhadhari
....Petitioner
Vs.
Pritam Singh and others
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL
Present:Ms. Gaganpreet Kaur, Advocate, for the petitioner.
A.N. JINDAL, J (ORAL)
The Civil Judge (Junior Division), Patiala, vide order dated 15.01.2005 allowed the application for ad-interim injunction of the plaintiff-respondent Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondents'). The Additional District Judge, Patiala, vide order dated 03.05.2010 (Annexure P-2) upheld the same in appeal. Both orders are under challenge.
On perusal of the two orders dated 14.09.2006 passed by this Court and dated 10.04.2007 passed by Divisional Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala, brought on record during the pendency of the appeal, it transpires that the order dated 15.01.2005 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Patiala, and order dated 21.08.2006 passed by the Additional District Judge, Patiala, were upheld and the revision filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 14.09.2006.
No grounds to interfere.
Dismissed.
(A.N.JINDAL) JUDGE
15th of March, 2011 ajp
Samadhan Jogian Dudhadhari
Pritam Singh
A.N. JINDAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
