Himachal Pradesh High Court
Sardar Govinder Singh vs Sardar Tejinder Singh And Others on 7 May, 2015
Author: Mansoor Ahmad Mir
Bench: Chief Justice, Dharam Chand Chaudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
LPA No.6 of 2007.
Decided on: May 07, 2015
.
Sardar Govinder Singh .......Appellant.
versus
Sardar Tejinder Singh and others ........Respondents.
___________________________________________________________________
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice.
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
For the Appellant: Mr.B.C. Negi, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr.R.L. Sood, Senior Advocate, with
Mr.Arjun K. Lal and Mr.Sanjeev Kumar,
Advocates, for respondent No.1.
Nemo for respondents No.2 and 3.
____________________________________________________________
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, C.J.
This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order, dated 2nd January, 2007, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby the suit of the plaintiff (appellant herein) came to be stayed, (for short, the impugned order).
2. The appeal is pending on the docket of this Court for the last about eight years, though a trivial issue is involved.
3. We have gone through the impugned order, needs no interference.
4. At this stage, Mr.B.C. Negi, learned counsel for the appellant, argued that the additional issue, i.e. Issue No.12-A, ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:07:47 :::HCHP ...2...
framed in the suit, vide order dated 6th January, 2005, has not been .
framed in the earlier suit and prayed that the order be set aside.
5. The argument is misconceived for the following reason. The learned Single Judge has discussed all the facts and exercised caution by providing that the parties, including the plaintiff, are at liberty to raise all pleas in the earlier suit. It is apt to reproduce the relevant portion of the impugned order herein:
"...............The property involved is also same and the parties are at liberty to take all the pleas raised by them including the plaintiff who filed the present suit............................".
6. Having said so, the grievance of the appellant/plaintiff stands redressed.
7. Viewed thus, there is no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed.
8. Pending CMPs, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Mansoor Ahmad Mir) Chief Justice.
May 07, 2015. (Dharam Chand Chaudhary) (Tilak) Judge ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:07:47 :::HCHP