The revision-petitioner sought to withdraw the petition after counsel requested permission. The High Court dismissed the revision-petition accordingly.
Revision-petition withdrawn and dismissed.
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.
128
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CR No.897 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.05.2024
Ashish Kumar
…..Revisionist-Petitioner.
Versus
Kaushal Devi alias Kushal Devi
.....Respondent.
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA
Present:Mr. Mayank Sharma, Advocate for the revisionist-petitioner.
MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J . (Oral)
At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the instant revision-petition, while submitting that the petitioner would resort to the appropriate and efficacious remedy, as may be permissible to him under law, before the trial Court.
having been withdrawn accordingly.
(MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) May 20, 2024 JUDGE Yag Dutt Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether Reportable: No
YAG DUTT 2024.05.20 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
Ashish Kumar
Kaushal Devi alias Kushal Devi
Meenakshi I. Mehta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
