Writ petition by a company against the Revenue was withdrawn at the petitioner's request after partial hearing, with liberty to file afresh. The court disposed of the petition and pending miscellaneous applications on that basis.
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.
103+266
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-2130-2023 (O&M) DECIDED ON: 14.10.2024
M/S NECTAR LIFESCIENCES LTD .....PETITIONER
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
.....RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.
Present: Mr. Chanderhas Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Sourabh Goel, Senior Standing Counsel, and Ms. Geetika Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent(s)/Revenue.
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J (ORAL)
Learned counsel for the petitioner, after hearing for some time, prays for withdrawal of the present writ petition, with liberty to file a fresh one.
Accordingly, present writ petition is disposed of, with the liberty
as recorded here above.
Pending miscellenous application(s), if any, also stand disposed
of.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE
(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE
14.10.2024 Lavisha
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No
LAVISHA 2024.10.14 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh
M/S Nectar Lifesciences Ltd
Union of India and Others
Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
Sanjay Vashisth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
