Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VIRINDER AGGARWAL
Ram Chander – Appellant
Versus
Ishwar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIRINDER AGGARWAL, J.
1. This consolidated judgment shall govern the disposal of the above-captioned Regular Second Appeals (hereinafter referred to as the “RSAs”), which emanate from a common factual substratum and involve substantially similar questions of law. In view of the identity of parties, the overlapping nature of the impugned judgments and decrees, and with the consent of learned counsel, the appeals are being adjudicated and disposed of conjointly to ensure consistency, judicial economy, and procedural expediency.
2. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the factual matrix has been succinctly drawn from the records of both appeals and is treated as the representative foundation for the present adjudication. Though certain issues may vary in each appeal, the material facts are substantially common and are, therefore, collectively adopted for purposes of this consolidated determination.
3. The appellants, by way of the present RSAs, assail the judgments and decrees passed by the learned First Appellate Courts, impugning the correctness and legality thereof.
4. The plaintiff, Ram Chander, instituted a civil suit No.779 of 1987 seeking a decree of permanent injunct
Second appeals in Punjab and Haryana are governed by Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, not by Section 100 CPC.
The court upheld the validity of a consent decree, ruling that the deceased had the authority to alienate property as separate property, and the plaintiffs failed to prove fraud.
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
