Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Tarsem Kumar Kansal vs Balbir Singh And Others on 26 July, 2013

Author: K. Kannan

Bench: K. Kannan

            CR No. 4320 of 2013                                        1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH


                                                       CR No. 4320 of 2013
                                                       Date of decision: July 26, 2013
            Tarsem Kumar Kansal

                                                                 ....... Petitioner
                                                 Versus


            Balbir Singh and others
                                                                 ........ Respondents

            CORAM:                    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

            Present:-                 Mr. Chetan Mittal, Senior Advocate with
                                      Mr. Kunal Mulwani, Advocate
                                      for the petitioner.

                                            ****

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

2. To be referred to the reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?

K. Kannan, J (oral).

1. The petitioner is aggrieved that the Court, while rejecting his plea for injunction, has observed that the document relied on by the plaintiff is not itself an agreement but it is an agreement to obtain an agreement of sale. This finding, according to him decides the enforceability or otherwise of the agreement sued upon by the plaintiff. It is too well known a position that any observation rendered at the interlocutory stage for considering an application cannot fetter rights of court nor can deny the party to plead that can secure an adjudication without in any way being affected by such observation. However, since the petitioner has an apprehension that this might come in the way. I clarify that it Archana Arora 2013.07.29 17:18 I am the author of this document High Court Chandigarh CR No. 4320 of 2013 2 should be taken as only observation for disposal of the injunction petition and not to be considered as binding or relevant at the stage of consideration of the issues involved in suit.

2. In the manner in which I have disposed of the civil revision, I have dispensed with notice to the respondents since I do not think that the trial of the suit which seems to be poised to take off is in any way affected by the pendency of the civil revision before this Court.

3. The civil revision is disposed of at this stage with the above observations.

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE July 26, 2013 archana Archana Arora 2013.07.29 17:18 I am the author of this document High Court Chandigarh