Petitioner sought writ of mandamus under Articles 226/227 directing respondent to decide a pending main appeal and stay application. The Court held no grounds were made out for such direction and dismissed the petition.
Writ petition dismissing the direction to decide the appeal and stay application.
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
CWP No.19124 of 2016 Date of decision: 30.09.2016
M/s Maxair Industry
....Petitioner
Versus
Union Territory, Chandigarh and another
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN
Present: - Mr. Gautam Diwan, Advocate, for the petitioner.
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
Prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for directing respondent No.1 to decide application for stay as well as the main appeal.
(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE
(RAMENDRA JAIN) 30.09.2016 JUDGE
R.S.
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No
Ravinder Singh 2016.10.03 14:24 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
2 issues framed by the court
Whether direction under Article 226 can be issued to decide a main appeal without made-out grounds.
Whether issuance of mandamus to decide stay application and main appeal is maintainable.
M/s Maxair Industry
Union Territory, Chandigarh
Ajay Kumar Mittal
Ramendra Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
