← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaRSA/2152/2013dismissed

Harjinder Singh And ORS v. Mohinder Singh

2015-07-14Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Sanghi2 pages

CM-5853-C-2013 in/and RSA-2152-2013 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM-5853-C-2013 in/and RSA-2152-2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 14, 2015 Harjinder Singh and others .....Appellants

Versus

Mohinder Singh ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

Present:

Mr.Rajinder Goyal, Advocate for the applicant-appellants.

Mr.Rajesh Sethi, and Mr.Arun Biriwal, Advocates for the respondent.

........

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? Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.(Oral) CM-5853-C-2013 After hearing the learned counsel for the applicantappellants and going through the contents of the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, delay of 90 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

CM disposed of.

MEENU 2015.07.17 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

CM-5853-C-2013 in/and RSA-2152-2013 (O&M) -2RSA-2152-2013 Learned counsel for the appellants submits that during pendency of the present appeal, better sense has prevailed and the parties to the lis have sorted out their disputes and effected a compromise and in pursuance thereof, the respondent has executed a sale deed in favour of wife of appellant No.1Amandeep Kaur and appellant No.4-Sukhpreet Kaur. In support of his contention, the learned counsel has produced in the Court today, civil miscellaneous application (to be numbered by the Registry) along with affidavits of appellant Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5. The affidavit of the respondent has also been enclosed with the above application. The copy of the sale deed has also been placed on record. The application and the documents annexed therewith are taken on record.

In view of the sale deed executed by the respondent in favour of wife of appellant No.1 and appellant No.4, learned counsel for the appellants prays for withdrawal of the present appeal.

Mr.Rajesh Sethi, Advocate assisted by Mr.Arun Biriwal, Advocate, states that he has no objection to the above statement of the learned counsel for the appellants.

Dismissed as withdrawn.

July 14, 2015 (NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) meenu JUDGE MEENU 2015.07.17 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh