Prithvi Nath Sharma v. Sat Parkash
IN TH HE HIGH COURT FOR THE E STATES OF PUNJAB AND HANDIGARH HARYANA AT CH $ %& &'
+ ) ,- .)/ ,0 1 $2 $
)
, ,0) () *
)3,0.) )0
"
!" " ! Mr. 2
) -0' & !#
3&! (!& '
'
4
& & ! ( - (
' (
!
!
6 "# "$
& ! '( ) * +( ' &( ( ! & ' 4 !( , -'
1 !&!'( &'( &
''(0 &&&( & ' & &(!(!& & ((& & ( ( .
""
"""/ - 3' (!( &' !0 0 & ' 1( ! &
& 3&& '(; ! !1 7'8 2 & ' '& ' & ( & ' ' ' &( ( ! (
< & ' &( &( 0' 1 '!
!&0
&' 1 & 9&& &' '
' '' ' 4
, -' 1 0 & "4
3&&'( (1((' 0'
' && '( '( 3 & '' 1 '
' 4 4 + + 1 !6 ( '( ! ' , ' 0'
: 1
<'0' &''1(( ' ! ! ( '( ) ( & (' '
'&!( ' -' 1' & &( & & (( & . %"
""
"""/ & ' &(
*(0 &( &&(! +(- ( 3 ' &!& &&( !( ! ( 9 !( 1 ''(( 9 1 '( &'( &/! ' 0 "$
$ 0 6
4
$
&&( 1
-0 & (0&! !+ + 0
0&!(( 1 ! + 1 &&(( + 1 ' &&( ( ! 0 ' ' (& 0 0 !( &&'
(( ' &( ((& &( ! ! &&( ( + ' ' 1 & ! ( + 0
"$
$ $ & ! &&(( + &&( & ! & 1 ! '(!! 1 &&( & 910 && ' !0 & &( & ! & 1 ! &&(( +
$
4 ! &&( & ! & 1 & & 9' '
'! ! &&(1 && ( 3 & & ! ( ! & !!' (&1( (( && !&&((+!
!&&( 910 ' &&(1 !&&((+ $
1 & &&( & ! & ( & 910 &&(( + (&( 1
1' 1 0 0 & & 9' & ! '( &'( & 1 ((1 && &'
&'! ' + + 9 ' & ( !(! , 0 ( ' ( & ' !( ( 0( (&('' $ < 0 (! ' ! ( ' ( & 0(( &( &! &&((+ &'
'
+ + & (( '( &'( & , ' & &
5 ((( ((!(! 1(( '(&'
3 ' 6 9 + ' ' ' &!(' &'( !'
' + + '( & '( &/ 3 0!' 9 % $ ($" + "
- 7 742
!
!" # $ % & &'$ + =
($$ $ ) $) % $ * + " ,- .""/ 01 '' 3 )" $ % $ # #! $ + 4 ,- 42 " % $
0! + .1 . "1
2 ("/) ) % $
5/ + .601 7 .1 .8 "1 442 9 % $
0! $ + .
1 . "1 772 : 9
' %
;$ $ <
+ ,- - 42 ( % $ + 7 ,- 47 $) " ($/ % $ * * $2 ,-
" ) % ;$ $ + 77 ,- -
5
- (&(''1(( '&;
; &!&& &((+ 0( &&( 1 & ! &&(( + 1 !
6 !&&((+ ( &( " ! +0 $& ' !6 (( "$
1 & 11& &
3 0 ' '0 1 & 1 1 '0 :' 3
"5
&&(( +
! ' '& !0 :' 1 &'( "%
-& (
"5
5 1 &'( 1 ! &&(( + & ' &&'
5!+'' 1 1' 1 & &4"'&& &'!&&((+ 9' 1 '( 0( &0 '
= > + +
&1' &' (4" !0 '' & &!('&'( 1 ' .(' '!&('&3 '' )"
$ % $ #! $ + 4 ,- 4 " %
$ 0 0! + .1 . "1 "1
) 1 1 "%
&'( & 1'0!'(:'
"5
910 ' &4"(& & ' 1 6
?hile adjourning the case e to
6 16.07.2024 4 to await the appearance of the petitioner as the statutory perio od of 30 days ha ad not elapsed by then, the appel llate Court failed to consider the fact that ' (0: ! &(6' &'
'( 1 ! & &!( ' & !1 1 ' &!(' &'( &'& 1 ( 4" .' ': ' ! ("/ /) ) %
$ 5/ .601 + 7 .
.1 .8 "1 44
-''( 01 ' !0( 01 (1(1 !0' & & ((1 &
&! (- ( '(
! +.- 5$ 6 "# "$
& ! '( ) * +( ( ' &( ( ' 4 !( , -' 1! & ! '( &'( & 1(('(& &'
910 & '!+ + '' 1 & 1 !6' '& !( && !( '5
,!' '&!( ' & (( ! (!( ! 6 '( ' !6' ( !( ! & ! '' +'''1(1
(!0'
'&&('(! '' +(!
!( ''+ ((
1 !! & :& ( (( ! :& & & ! (' ''+&(
3((&&'& !&&((+ ((
, '(' &(&&! &&(( + 1 & 1 & ((! !
, '( ((0!
5&!+
27.08.2024 (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE
Whet ther speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whet ther reportable Yes/No