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

JASWANT SINGH
Manjit Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Darshan Singh – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. R.K. Joshi, Advocate.
For the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4:Mr. Puneet Sharma, Advocate..

JUDGMENT

Jaswant Singh, J.—Present petition preferred by the plaintiff-petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution is directed against the impugned order dated 04.09.2010 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Dasuya whereby an application filed by him for restoration of the suit has been dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff-petitioner filed a civil suit No.76 dated 16.07.1997 against defendants-respondents for possession of land measuring 40 kanal19 Marlas situated in village Talwandi Dadian District Hoshiarpur is described in the head note of the plaint.

3. It transpires that during the pendency of the suit, none appeared for the plaintiff on 05.11.2005 (P1) and the suit was dismissed in default for want of prosecution by the learned trial Court. An application (P2) on the same day i. e. 05.11.2005 is purported to have been filed for restoration of the suit but the same has been dismissed by learned trial Court vide order dated 04.09.2010 (P3).

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that learned trial Court has wrongly dismissed the application for restoration by invoking t


























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