The Court dismissed the civil revision petition challenging the closure of petitioner-defendant evidence by the lower court, holding the petition time-barred due to delay and laches in filing after nearly one year.
Civil Revision No. 1680 of 2012 dismissed due to delay and laches.
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. 1680 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision: 20.3.2012
Jeet Kaur @ Surjit Kaur
.. Petitioner
Vs.
Kulwinder Kaur and others
.. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Ms. Sumati Jund, Advocate for Mr. Rajesh Punj, Advocate for the petitioner.
Rajesh Bindal J.
Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 23.4.2011, passed by the learned court below, where by the evidence of the petitioner-defendant No. 2 in the suit was closed by order of the court.
It has been observed by the learned court below that despite grant of numerous opportunities, the evidence was not concluded.
Considering the fact that the impugned order was passed way back on 23.4.2011 and the present petition has been filed in this court on 14.3.2012, the petition is dismissed on account of delay and laches.
( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge
20.3.2012 mk
Jeet Kaur @ Surjit Kaur
Kulwinder Kaur and others
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
