The single judge condoned a delay of 57 days in re-filing the appeal under C.M. No. 4205-C of 2015 and allowed the same, referring to the detailed reasons provided in RSA No. 384 of 2015.
Delay of 57 days in re-filing the appeal was condoned; C.M. No. 4205-C of 2015 allowed.
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
RSA No.1508 of 2015 (O&M) Date of decision:16.11.2018
Inder (since deceased) through LRs
... Appellant
Vs.
Ranga Ram and others ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
Present:Mr. J.K.Chauhan, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. S.S.Salar, Advocate for the respondent(s).
AMIT RAWAL J. (Oral)
C.M.No.4205-C of 2015
For the reasons stated in the application which is duly supported by an affidavit, delay of 57 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned.
C.M. stands allowed.
RSA No.1508 of 2015 (O&M)
For order, see detailed reasons recorded in a separate order of
even date passed in RSA No.384 of 2015 titled as Gurnam Singh Vs. Ranga Ram and others.
(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE November 16, 2018 savita Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No
SAVITA KADIAN 2018.11.28 14:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gurnam Singh Vs. Ranga Ram and othersReferred¶15
RSA No.384 of 2015 titled as Gurnam Singh Vs. Ranga Ram and others
Inder (since deceased) through LRs
Ranga Ram and others
AMIT RAWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
