Madan and Others v. Sammat @ Sampat and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court dismissed the petitioner-respondent's revision challenging the trial court's refusal to stay a possession suit. The Court held that since the partition order was implemented and mutation was sanctioned in 2007-08, the revision's pendency did not halt the implementation, and the suit for possession was properly maintained.
What the court decided
-1-
CR-4472-2017 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CR-4472-2017 (O&M)
Date of decision: 12.01.2018
Madan and others
..... Petitioners
Versus
Sammat @ Sampat and another
..... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN
PRESENT: Mr. Sandeep Kotla, Advocate for the petitioner.
RAMENDRA JAIN, J. (ORAL)
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the pendency of a revision against a partition order prevents the stay of a subsequent suit for possession filed by the executing party of that order.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Madan and others
- respondent
Sammat @ Sampat and another
Coram
RAMENDRA JAIN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Punjab & Haryana HC
- Decided on
- · January
- Registered
- Case no.
- CR/4472/2017
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court