Disposed

Jagpal Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Sept 2024CR/1998/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged an order of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Indri declining ad interim injunction in a civil suit. By consent, defendants to file written statement with reply to injunction application; trial court to decide it within one month. Status quo regarding disputed property directed meanwhile. Petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Status quo on disputed property till decision of temporary injunction application; written statement with reply to be filed and decided within one month, without prejudice to Order 7 Rule 11 CPC appli

Jagpal Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and… — Property and Title | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

AT CHANDIGARH

117+304

CM-13023-CII-2024; CM-13024-CII-2024 in/and CR-1998-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision.:04.09.2024

¶5

Jagpal Singh and Others Pe11oners

¶6

Vs.

¶7

State of Haryana and Others Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

¶9

Present: Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the pe��oners.

¶10

Mr. R.K.S. Brar, Addl. AG, Haryana for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶11

Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.12.

¶12

¶13

DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

¶14

CM-13023-CII-2024:

¶15

Statement is made by learned counsel for the pe��oners so as to

¶16

withdraw this applica�on with liberty to avail alterna�ve remedies available to him in accordance with law.

¶17

In view of the aforesaid statement made by learned counsel for the pe��oners, present applica�on is hereby dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid.

¶18

Main case.:

¶19

Pe��oners approached this Court by challenging the order dated 20.02.2024 (Annexure P-5) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Indri (Karnal) in civil suit No.57 of 2024 �tled “Gurnam Singh (since deceased) etc. Vs.

¶20

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2024.09.04 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

CM-13023-CII-2024; CM-13024-CII-2024 in/and CR-1998-2024 (O&M) -2-

¶22

State of Haryana etc.”, whereby the prayer made by them for ad interim injunc�on was deemed to be declined, inasmuch as the Court was of the opinion that interest of jus�ce would be served if wri9en statement is filed by the defendants and then a comprehensive decision is taken on merits of the case.

¶23

Conten�on of learned counsel for the respondents is that his applica�on under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is s�ll pending.

¶24

Before this Court, it has been agreed that defendants would file the wri9en statement along with the reply to the injunc�on applica�on and the Court will take a decision on that applica�on, within one month from the date of filing of the wri9en statement. This will be without any prejudice to the rights of the respondent regarding the applica�on under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. It is also directed that trial Court will not be influenced by any opinion whatsoever of this Court in deciding the applica�on for temporary injunc�on or in deciding the applica�on under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. Till the applica�on for temporary injunc�on is decided, both the par�es shall maintain status quo regarding property in dispute.

¶25

Disposed of.

¶26

Pending applica�on(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶27

( DEEPAK GUPTA ) JUDGE

¶28

September 04, 2024 Nee�ka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶29

NEETIKA TUTEJA 2024.09.04 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Jagpal Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagpal Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narender Kumar Vs State of Haryana

Dalip Singh and Anr. Vs Rajiv Singla and Ors.

Makhan Singh Vs Punjab Wakf Board and Others

Ajit Singh Alias Ajit Pal Singh Vs Surjit Kaur and Others

Sain Dass Gupta and Co. Vs Devi Dayal and Another

Baljit Singh Vs State of Punjab