Disposed¶15

Sudesh Sharma v. Avinash Chander and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC30 Jan 2026COCP/899/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sudesh Sharma vs Avinash Chander; COCP No.899 of 2007 (O&M); contempt petition; alleged violation of decree dated 02.12.2003; suit partly decreed then decreed in toto on appeal; RSA-3976-2005 dismissed as withdrawn 16.10.2023; recalling application withdrawn; petition disposed of with liberty to revive; pending applications disposed of; Vikas Bahl; High Court of Punjab & Haryana, Chandigarh; 30.01.2026.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with liberty granted to the petitioner to revive it in case any cause survives; pending applications, if any, disposed of. ¶15

Sudesh Sharma Vs Avinash Chander and Anr. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

201

¶3

COCP No.899 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision: January 30^th , 2026

Sudesh Sharma

.....Petitioner

Versus

Avinash Chander and another

¶8

....Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL

¶10

Present: Mr. J.S. Cooner, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the present case, the suit filed by the petitioner was partly decreed and thereafter on appeal, the said suit was decreed in toto. It is submitted that RSA-3976-2005 was filed in which the operation of the judgment of the First Appellate Court was stayed and it was observed that the trial Court judgment would remain in operation. It is submitted that the present contempt petition was filed on the averment that the decree dated 02.12.2003 has been violated.

¶13

As per the report of Registry, RSA-3976-2005 has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 16.10.2023 and thereafter even the application for recalling has been withdrawn.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that even the petitioner has not approached his office and thus, in the said circumstances, the present petition be disposed of but liberty be granted to the petitioner to revive the same in case any cause survives.

¶15

Disposed of with aforesaid liberty.

¶16

Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.

¶17

January 30^th, 2026 Puneet		(VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned	:	Yes
Whether reportable	:	No

¶18

PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.01.30 16:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Sudesh Sharma v. Avinash Chander and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudesh Sharma v. Avinash Chander and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Musarat Jahan and Others Vs Niranjan Singh and Others

Fulvanti and Others Vs Anil Vij and Others

Hardeep Singh and Ors. Vs Dalbara Singh and Ors.

M/S Dev Raj Institution of Management & Technology Vs Ved Kumar Sharma and Another

Gopal Lal Chodhary @ Gopal Lal Choudhary Vs Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and Others

Balwinder Singh Vs Satnam Singh and Others