The High Court dismissed a revision petition seeking amendment of a written statement as infructuous, as the trial court had already passed a preliminary decree of partition before the revision could effectively be heard, and the petitioners had filed an appeal against that decree.
Revision petition dismissed as infructuous.
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 FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.R.No.7072 of 2010 Date of Order: 2.2.2011
Hari Om and another
.....Petitioners
Vs.
Shyam Sunder and others
.....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present: Mr. Gautam Kailey, Advocate for Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr.Sanjay Vij, Advocate for respondent No.1plaintiff.
JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL)
Grievance of the petitioners in the present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is against the order dated 22.9.2010 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.), Gurgaon whereby their application for amendment of written statement has been dismissed.
Learned counsel for respondent No.1-plaintiff points out that after filing of the present revision petition, learned trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 17.11.2010 has passed preliminary decree of partition against which the petitioners have filed an appeal and, therefore, the present petition has become infructuous.
Proxy counsel appearing for respondent No.1-plaintiff is unable to refute the aforesaid contention.
Dismissed as infructuous.
February 02, 2011 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE
Hari Om and another
Shyam Sunder and others
Jaswant Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
