Revision petition challenging an order allowing the respondents' application to amend their plaint. Both sides agreed the petition had become infructuous; the court dismissed it as infructuous and disposed of pending applications.
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.
1
CR No.26 of 2022 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
325
CR No.26 of 2022 (O&M) Date of Decision:27.04.2026
SARABJIT KAUR
......Petitioner
Vs
PARMINDER SINGH AND ORS.
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. P.S. Guliani, Advocate for the respondents.
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral)
By way of present revision pet i tion, prayer has been made for quashing of or d er dated 09.12.2021 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Ju n ior Division) Mog a , whereby the application und e r Order 6 Rule 17 CPC read w ith Section 151 CPC preferred at the instance of the plaintiffs/respondents for amendment of t h e plaint, was allowed.
Le a rned counsel for the both the p arties are ad idem that the pre s ent
revision petitio n has rendered infructuous. Di s missed as having become infru c tuous. Pe n ding application(s), if any shall also stand disposed of.
(HARKESH MANUJA) April 27, 2026 JUDGE Atik W h ether speaking/reasoned Ye s /No W h ether reportable Ye s /No
MOHMED ATIK 2026.04.27 18:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Sarabjit Kaur
Parminder Singh and ors.
Harkesh Manuja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
