Sham Lal Vs Financial Commissioner and Ors.

PRESENT: - Mr. P.S. Sikand, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sukhvinder Singh Nara, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Mr. Surinder Mohan Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.5.

¶10

. . .

¶11

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. In view of report dated 15.3.2011 furnished by Block Development & Panchayat Officer, Raipur Rani, District Panchkula, that indicates that there is no obstruction in the street, no further orders need be passed in this petition.

¶12

CWP No.4027 of 2009 [2]

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that cause of action does not survive any more. 3. The petition is accordingly disposed of. 4. It is made clear that in case petitioner again raises any kind of construction by obstructing the street, respondent No.5 or any other inhabitant would be at liberty to file an application under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (as applicable to Haryana).

¶14

(AJAI LAMBA)

¶15

March 25, 2011 JUDGE avin

¶16

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶17

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Sham Lal v. Financial Commissioner and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sham Lal v. Financial Commissioner and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajpal Vs State of Punjab

Sant Singh Vs Deputy Commissioner Ludhiana and Ors.

Bhadur Singh Vs F.C. (APPEALS-1), Pb. & Ors.

Darshan Singh and Ors. Vs Financial Commissioner Revenue Pb. and Anr.

Pala Ram Vs State of Haryana etc.

Madan Lal Vs State of Haryana and Ors.