Petition declared infrunctuous and dismissed after petition for residence order (DV Act) was dismissed by trial court.
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 & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-17629 of 2015 (O&M) Date of decision : 4.7.2018
Suraj Parkash and another ................Petitioners
vs.
Richa Sharma .................Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Madaan
Present: Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate for petitioner No.2– Sarlesh Verma
Mr. Karan S. Gill, Advocate for the respondent.
H. S. Madaan, J. (Oral)
Petitioner No.1. Suraj Parkash has already died.
It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that petition under Sections 12, 18, 19, 22, 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, filed by petitioner Richa Sharma has since been dismissed against respondent No.1 Tarun Verma and respondent No.3 Sarlesh Verma, by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panchkula, vide judgment dated 22.3.2018, photocopy of which has been attached with Crl.M.No. M-11712-2015. This fact is not disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. As such the present petition has become infructuous and is dismissed accordingly.
chugh
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No
Banita Chugh 2018.07.05 13:28 I am the author of this document
Suraj Parkash and another
Richa Sharma
H. S. Madaan
Ashish Aggarwal
Karan S. Gill
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
