Disposed¶15

Kuljinder Kaur v. Gursewak Singh and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Mar 2026TA/292/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Non-prosecution / incomplete filing; objection raised by Registry not cleared; Rule 9 Chapter I Part-A Volume V Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules and Orders; 40-day re-filing period; cause-list publication ignored; application consigned to record room; disposed of; Kuljinder Kaur v. Gursewak Singh and Another; TA-292-2026; decided 07.03.2026; single judge Archana Puri.

What did the court decide?

Under Rule 9, Chapter I, Part-A, Volume V of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules and Orders, an application on which the Registry raises an objection must be taken back by the counsel/party who filed it and re-filed within a total period of 40 days; failure to do so results in the matter being listed before the Court for orders. ¶13

Kuljinder Kaur Vs Gursewak Singh and Another — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Sr. No.104 TA-292-2026 Date of Decision: 07.03.2026

KULJINDER KAUR

....Applicant

Versus

GURSEWAK SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶7

....Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI

¶9

Present: None.

¶10

¶11

ARCHANA PURI, J. (Oral)

¶12

The present application was filed in the year 2025 wherein, the objection was raised by the Registry. Thereafter, none had bothered to clear the said objection and the incomplete petition is still pending with the Registry of this Court. Thus, it has been listed before this Court for further orders.

¶13

As per Rule 9, Chapter I, Part-A, Volume V of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules and Orders, the application on which some objection is raised by the Registry, the same is required to be taken back by the counsel/party, who filed it, to be re-filed within a total period of 40 days. However, the same was never taken back for the purposes of re-filing and thus, the case is listed before this Court for orders.

¶14

Keeping in view the fact that none has come forward to clear the objection, raised by the Registry, so as to get the application listed, despite the fact that note was published in the cause list for the information of the respective counsel to clear the objection in the cases which are lying pending with the Registry, the petition calls for no further consideration and the same be consigned to the record room.

¶15

Accordingly, the case stands disposed of.

¶16

			(ARCHANA PURI) JUDGE
07.03.2026
Preeti S.
	Whether speaking/reasoned	:	Yes/No
	Whether reportable	:	Yes/No

¶17

PREETI 2026.03.07 14:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Kuljinder Kaur v. Gursewak Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuljinder Kaur v. Gursewak Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anuradha Vs Rahul

Soniya Vs Navjot Kumar

Gagandeep Kaur Vs Amandeep Singh Alias Jolly

Sunita Vs Karambir

Hafeejan & Ors. Vs Bhavay Tayal and Ors.

Shree Bawa Lal Dyal Sabha Partap Bagh Jalandhar Vs Pujari Chottan Dass and Anr.