The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the writ petition as infructuous on the ground that it had become infructuous, without recording any substantive legal arguments.
The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous.
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
125 CWP-24817 of 2022 (O&M) Date of decision: 28.10.2022
Surinder Kumar
...Petitioner
Versus
Punjab National Bank and another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN
Present: Mr. N.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Gaurav Goel, Advocate for the respondent-Bank.
M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, J. (Oral)
Counsel for the petitioner states that the writ petition has
become infructuous.
Recording the same, the writ petition is dismissed as
infructuous.
(M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO) JUDGE
| 28.10.2022 sumit.k |
(H.S. MADAA JUDGE |
N) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether speaking/reasoned : | Yes | No | |
| Whether Reportable : | Yes | No |
SUMIT KUMAR 2022.10.28 17:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
Surinder Kumar
Punjab National Bank
another
M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO
H.S. MADAAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
