SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(SC) 377

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, KURIAN JOSEPH
KARAM KAUR – Appellant
Versus
JALANDHAR IMPROVEMENT TRUST – Respondent


JUDGMENT : -

Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J. –

Leave granted.

2. These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 8th July, 2011 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Misc. Nos.11669-C to 11672-C of 2010 in R.S.A. No.1908 of 1995. By the impugned judgment, the High Court rejected the following Petitions:

(i) Civil Misc. Application under Section 151 C.P.C. for setting aside order dated 14th May, 2010 dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution;

(ii) Civil Misc. Petition under Section 5 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay in bringing LRs on record and for setting aside order dismissing appeal in default; and

(iii) Civil Misc. Application under Order 22 Rule 3 C.P.C. for bringing LRs. of deceased appellant on record.

However, the High Court allowed the other applications under Sections 151 C.P.C to place on record the copies of judgment and decree dated 20th January, 2004 passed in RSA No.1822 of 2003 – Ajinder Kaur vs. Jalandhar Improvement Trust and judgment dated 15th March, 2000 in RSA No.3673/2000 – Jalandhar Improvement Trust vs. Harbhajan Kaur and others.

3. The case of the applicant, wife of original plaintiff – Ramesh Chander is that one Nasi


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top