Back
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
PARMOD GOYAL, J
BALWANT SINGH – Appellant
Versus
SMT. SARANJEET KAUR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership claimed based on valid documentation. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. evidentiary objections must be raised at the time of evidence tendering. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court upheld plaintiff's ownership based on valid legal principles. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. appeal dismissed upholding decree from lower courts. (Para 9) |
PARMOD GOYAL, J. (ORAL)
CM-9596-C-2025 This is an application for condonation of delay of 32 days in refiling the present appeal.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the delay of 32 days in refiling the present appeal, is hereby condoned.
Main Case Unsuccessful defendant-appellant has preferred second appeal before this Court being aggrieved by impugned judgment and decree dated 31.10.2023 passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Shahabad and judgment and decree dated 22.05.2025 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra, by which, suit of the plaintiff was decreed as well as upheld by Appellate Court and defence taken by defendant-appellant was rejected.
2. Brief facts giving rise to present lis are that the plaintiff claimed the suit property to be owned and possessed by him on the basis of sale-dee
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
