Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Bipin Chander Negi, J
Netar – Appellant
Versus
Vivek and others – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of unauthorized delay in evidence submission. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. importance of timely document production under procedural law. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's limited power under article 227 for correcting errors. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. final ruling based on presented arguments and legal standards. (Para 11) |
Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral )
Heard counsel for the petitioner & respondent/State and perused the pleadings appended along-with the present petition and the impugned order. The impugned order dated 26.03.2025 is an order, passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Court No.1, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., whereby, an application filed by the present petitioner, plaintiff before the trial Court, stands rejected.
2. The suit in the case at hand was filed in August, 2017. The suit filed by the petitioner was one for grant of permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction. In the suit, it has been averred that the suit land was jointly owned and possessed by the predecessors-in-interest of respondents No.1 to 3, i.e., Shri Amrit Lal along-with other co-sharers. Out of the suit land, Amrit Lal is alleged to have sold his share to the present petitioner. Cons
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
