Sanjeev Kumar Sethi v. Ram Piari And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH C.R. No.966 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision.09.02.2016 Sanjeev Kumar Sethi .......Petitioner Vs.

Smt. Ram Piari through LRs and others ......Respondents

Present:

Mr. Ramesh Kumar Bamal, Advocate for the petitioner.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

2.

To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? -.- K. KANNAN J. (ORAL) 1.

The discretionary order of allowing for restoration is the subject of challenge in revision petition. I do not think any serious prejudice could be said to have been caused when the suit is for specific performance and rights to immovable property would require to be adjudicated upon.

2.

I do not find any illegality for inteference. The revision petition is dismissed.

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE February 09, 2016 Pankaj* PANKAJ KUMAR 2016.02.10 12:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document