A single-judge contempt proceedings order disposing of C.O.C.P.No.174 of 2012 after the respondent filed a reply-affidavit with a speaking order rejecting the petitioners' claim, leaving no cause for continuation.
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
C.O.C.P.No.174 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision : February 23, 2012
Madan Lal and others ..... Petitioners versus Avtar Singh Sharma ..... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.
Present : Mr.S.K.Rattan, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr.M.C.Berry, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.
-.-
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Surya Kant, J. (Oral)
The respondent has filed the reply-affidavit alongwith speaking order dated 3.1.2012 (Annexure R-1) whereby the claim of the petitioners has been rejected, leaving no cause to continue with these contempt proceedings.
The contempt petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to impugn the speaking order dated 3.1.2012 before an appropriate forum, if so advised.
February 23, 2012 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE
Madan Lal and others
Avtar Singh Sharma
Surya Kant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
