A revision petition was dismissed as infructuous because the petitioner had already obtained an ejectment order in an ejectment suit.
The revision petition was 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.2240 of 2000 Date of Decision.23.01.2013
Ram Saran Dass and sons (HUF)
.....Petitioner
Versus
S. Ali, SCO No.268 (Ist Floor), Sector 35-D, Chandigarh
.......Respondent
Present: Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Divyanshu Jain, Advocate for Mr. Arun Palli, Senior Advocate for the respondent.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
K. KANNAN J.(ORAL)
revision petition has become infructuous since in an ejectment petitioner, ejectment order has been obtained.
infructuous.
(K. KANNAN) JUDGE
January 23, 2013 Pankaj*
Ram Saran Dass and sons (HUF)
S. Ali
K. Kannan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
