Punjab-Haryana High Court
Madan Mohan Alias M.M.Chaudhary vs Harbhushan Lal And Others on 25 March, 2010
Author: Ajay Tewari
Bench: Ajay Tewari
CM No.7498-CII of 2010 ::1::
and SAO No.18 of 2010 (O & M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CM No.7498-CII of 2010
and SAO No.18 of 2010 (O & M)
Date of decision: 25.03.2010
Madan Mohan alias M.M.Chaudhary
.. Appellant
Versus
Harbhushan Lal and others
.. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
a). Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
b). To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
c). Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?
Present:- Mrs.Rupinder Kaur Thind, Advocate
for the appellant
. . .
AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL)
CM No.7498-CII of 2010 For the reasons recorded in the Civil Miscellaneous Application, same stands allowed and the delay of 139 days in refiling the appeal is condoned.
SAO No.18 of 2010 (O & M)
This appeal has been filed against the order of the learned Lower Appellate Court allowing the appeal of the respondent and remanding the case back to the Trial Court for decision of all the issues. It is not disputed that the learned Trial Court dismissed the suit only on a consideration of Issue No.7 by holding that the suit was not maintainable. Learned counsel has vehemently argued that even to give the finding of non-maintainability, the learned Trial Court has actually considered all the other issues. Even though, I find that the learned Trial Court has peripherally discussed the entire evidence while deciding Issue No.7, yet, it cannot be denied that the suit has been decided almost by treating Issue CM No.7498-CII of 2010 ::2::
and SAO No.18 of 2010 (O & M)
No.7 as preliminary issue. The learned Lower Appellate Court has rightly pointed out that it may ultimately be held that the suit had to be dismissed on the ground of non-maintainability, yet it is always in the interest of justice that the case should be decided issue-wise.
In these circumstances, I find no ground to interfere in the order of the learned Appellate Court .
Consequently, the present appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Since the main appeal has been decided, the stay application and Civil Miscellaneous Application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
March 25, 2010 (AJAY TEWARI) Sukhpreet JUDGE