The petitioner appeared in person. The court observed that notice could not be issued due to non-payment of process fee. Consequently, the proceeding was 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
138
CR-2589-2025 Date of decision : 18.08.2025
Basant Lal ...... Petitioner
versus
Shyam Sunder and others ...... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
Present: None for the petitioner.
PANKAJ JAIN, J. (Oral)
process fee.
(PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE 18.08.2025 Dinesh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether Reportable : No
DINESH KUMAR 2025.08.20 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Basant Lal
Shyam Sunder
PANKAJ JAIN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
