Petition filed with Registry objections was listed after counsel failed to re-file it within the prescribed 40 days. No one appeared for the petitioner when the case was called, so the Court disposed of the matter without passing further orders.
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 & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
143 I N COMP-3361-2024 D ate of decision: 22.11.2024
Nihal Chand
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Hary a na and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HO N ’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN C HAUDHARY
Present : N one.
AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)
orders are req u ired to be passed.
22.11.2024 (AMAN CHAUDHARY) ashok JUDGE
W hether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No W hether reportable : Yes / No
ASHOK KUMAR 2024.11.22 15:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nihal Chand
State of Haryana
Aman Chaudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
