Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VIRINDER AGGARWAL
Somoti – Appellant
Versus
Hoshiar Singh (since deceased) through LRs – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J .
1. This consolidated judgment governs the adjudication of the above-captioned Regular Second Appeal (hereinafter referred to as “RSA”) and the connected Contempt of Courts proceedings (hereinafter referred to as “COCP”), both of which emanate from an identical factual substratum and raise overlapping questions of law. Having regard to the identity of parties, the interlinked nature of the impugned decrees and proceedings, and with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, both matters are being taken up and disposed of together in the interest of judicial economy, consistency of legal reasoning, and procedural efficiency.
1.1. At the instance of learned counsel appearing in the RSA as well as the COCP, the factual matrix relevant for the purposes of the present consolidated adjudication has been carefully culled out from the records of both proceedings, as the same provides the most complete, coherent, and accurate narration of the material facts necessary for effective determination. It is apposite to note that vide order dated 18.02.2003, the aforesaid COCP was directed to be heard and decided conjointly with RSA-2654-2001
2. This ju
Second appeals in Punjab and Haryana are treated under Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918, emphasizing composite appeals for maintaining substantive justice rather than getting dismissed on te....
Consent decrees based on family settlements cannot be challenged on incorrect facts unless fraud is proven; registration is not required for such decrees when they involve pre-existing rights.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
