Petitioner Surinder Dhawan appeared in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana with counsel for Petitioner and a present counsel for Respondent U.T. Chandigarh. The Bench held that the petition is abated due to the death of the Petitioner and dismissed it as infructuous without substantive reasoning.
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.
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
225
CRM-M-2883-2018
Date of Decision: 21.12.2022
Surinder Dhawan …Petitioner
Versus
U.T. Chandigarh and Others …Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present:Mr. Aman Joon Advocate, for Mr. Rajiv Kataria, Advocate, for the petitioner
ASI Hemant Kumar for U.T., Chandigarh
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that petitioner has passed away thus, present petition stands abated.
Dismissed as infructuous.
(JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE
21.12.2022 Mohit Kumar
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No
MOHIT KUMAR 2022.12.21 04:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Surinder Dhawan
U.T. Chandigarh
Jagmohan Bansal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
