Petitioner contended the writ petition became infructuous after the trial court returned the complaint. The Single Judge orally dismissed the petition on these grounds. No detailed reasoning or alternative subject was captured in the brief order.
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
CRM-M-12831-2014 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 12, 2014
Ankur Mittal
.....Petitioner
Versus
Naveen Kumar Aggarwal and others
......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
Present: Mr.Sandeep Suri, Advocate for the petitioner.
Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.(Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned trial Court has returned the complaint to the complainant for filing the same with the proper Court, therefore, the present
petition has been rendered infructuous.
Ordered accordingly.
December 12, 2014
meenu
(Naresh Kumar Sanghi) Judge
MEENU 2014.12.12 17:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh
Ankur Mittal
Naveen Kumar Aggarwal and others
Naresh Kumar Sanghi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
