Disposed¶22

Kuldip Singh Kashyap v. Amrit Devi and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Nov 2025CWP/919/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh; CWP-919-2023 (O&M); decision dated 11.11.2025; Kuldeep Tiwari, J.; impleadment of legal representatives of deceased parties allowed; writ petition disposed of as no cause of action survived after death of respondent No.1, sole beneficiary of limited right of entry and residence conferred by order dated 10.11.2022 (Annexure P-3); no statute or precedent discussed; no monetary relief.

What did the court decide?

Both impleadment applications are allowed; the respective legal representatives of the petitioner and respondent No.1 are substituted in their place, and the amended memo of parties annexed to the application is taken on record. ¶16

Kuldip Singh Kashyap Vs Amrit Devi and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

103 CWP-919-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision : November 11, 2025

¶3

KULDIP SINGH KASHYAP (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRs

¶4

-PETITIONER

¶5

V/S

¶6

AMRIT DEVI (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH HER LRs AND ORS.

¶7

-RESPONDENTS

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

¶9

Present: Mr. Amar Singh Chahal, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Atul Kaushik, Advocate, and Mr. Anupam Sharma, Advocate for the respondents No.2 and 3.

¶11

Mr. Anil Sharma, Advocate for the respondent No.4.

¶12

¶13

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has today filed separate applications seeking the impleadment of the respective legal representatives of the petitioner and respondent No.1, both of whom have since passed away.

¶15

The Registry is directed to assign numbers to both the impleadment applications.

¶16

As prayed for, both impleadment applications are allowed. The respective legal representatives of the petitioner and respondent No.1 are ordered to be substituted in their place. The amended memo of parties, as annexed to the application, is taken on record.

¶17

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.11.13 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶18

CWP-919-2023 (O&M)

¶19

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, by virtue of the impugned order dated 10.11.2022 (Annexure P-3), only a limited right of entry and residence in the house in question was conferred upon respondent No.1, who has since expired, and therefore, no cause of action survives. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents does not dispute this submission.

¶21

In view of the supervening circumstance, namely, the demise of respondent No.1, who was the sole beneficiary of the right conferred under the impugned order, no cause of action now survives for continuation of the instant writ petition.

¶22

The instant writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶23

		(KU	LDEEP TIWARI)
November	11, 2025		JUDGE
devinder
	Whether speaking/reasoned	:	Yes/No
	Whether Reportable	:	Yes/No

¶24

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.11.13 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Kuldip Singh Kashyap v. Amrit Devi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldip Singh Kashyap v. Amrit Devi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohinder Singh Vs Presiding Officer Labour Court etc.

Sher Singh Vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hisar and Anr.

Subhash Gupta Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Bhagwan Dass Vs State of Punjab and Others

Birender Vs P.O. Labour Court Hissar and Ors.

State of Haryana Vs Vijender