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

2025 Supreme(P&H) 842

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
VIRINDER AGGARWAL
Dalip Singh – Appellant
Versus
Baljit – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Sanjay Mittal, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Virinder Aggarwal, J.

The appellant/plaintiff has instituted the present Regular Second Appeal (hereinafter referred to as "RSA") under Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918, assailing the judgments and decrees rendered by the Courts below. The appeal is primarily founded on the contention that the findings recorded by the learned Sub-Judge Ist Class, Jhajjar and the learned Additional District Judge(I), Rohtak, are contrary to law, founded upon a manifest misappreciation of evidence, and have occasioned substantial prejudice to the appellant, thereby warranting the intervention of this Court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction under the said provision.

2. For the sake of clarity and convenience in the discussion, the parties shall hereinafter be referred to as the plaintiff and the defendants, corresponding to their respective status before the learned Trial Court. The salient and material facts forming the foundation of the present proceedings, which are essential for an informed adjudication of the issues, are briefly narrated as follows:-

"The plaintiff instituted the present suit for permanent injunction, asserting that he is the lawful owner in possession of

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