Dismissed
Kamal K.Sharma v. Union Territory of Chandigarh
Punjab & Haryana HCCWP/1152/2000
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH…
What the court decided
AI extract
COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH…
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.
I N THE HI GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDI GARH
Civil Writ Petition No.1152 of 2000 (O&M) DATE OF DECI SI ON: 17.12.2013
Kam al K. Sharm a
…..Petitioner
versus
The Union Territory of Chandigarh and others
.....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTI CE SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL, CHI EF JUSTI CE HON’BLE MR. JUSTI CE AUGUSTI NE GEORGE MASI H
Present: None for the petitioner
Mr.S.K. Bawa, Advocate for respondent No.11
SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL, CHI EF JUSTI CE : (Oral)
In terms of order dated 23.4.2001, the petitioner was required to complete service whereafter the m atter was directed to be listed. For the last 13 years, the service has still not been com pleted and respondents No.5, 6, 8, 11, 14 to 19, 21 and 26 still rem ain unserved. However, learned counsel for respondent No.11 has entered appearance today. It appears that no steps have been taken to serve the respondents during this long period and the petitioner has lost interest in the matter.
Dismissed for non-prosecution.
( SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL ) CHI EF JUSTI CE
17.12.2013 ( AUGUSTI NE GEORGE MASI H) parkash* JUDGE
Chand Parkash 2013.12.17 14:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Kamal K. Sharma
The Union Territory of Chandigarh
Sanjay Kishan Kaul
Augustine George Masih
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court