Single judge recalled a nomenclature order and restored appeal number. In the second appeal, the judge held that exchange of property does not negate co-owner status in the original suit land, dismissing the appeal for no substantial question of law.
C.M. No.14082-C recalled; appeal restored to original number RSA No.2822; second appeal dismissed.
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
RSA No.2822 of 2015 (O&M) Date of Decision.27.11.2015
Charanjit Singh
......Appellant
Versus
Gurmel Singh and others
......Respondents
Present: Mr. Harkeerat Singh, Advocate for the appellant.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
K. KANNAN J. (ORAL)
C.M. No.14082-C of 2015
For the reasons stated in the application, order passed by this Court on 20.10.2015 is recalled and the appeal is restored to its original number.
Application is allowed.
RSA No.2822 of 2015
question of law.
(K. KANNAN) JUDGE
November 27, 2015
Pankaj*
PANKAJ KUMAR 2015.11.30 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the exchange of suit property with another property by the plaintiff affects his status as co-owner in the original Khasra.
Whether a second appeal presents a substantial question of law.
Charanjit Singh
Gurmel Singh
K. KANNAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
