Shani vs. Joginder Singh

RSA No.61 of 2016.

19.04.2016 Present: Mr. Lovneesh Kanwar, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. B.C. Verma, Advocate, for respondents No.1, 2 & 6.

Respondents No.3, 4, 5 & 7 have refused to accept the notice. They are validly served, however, there is no appearance on their behalf. Heard. Admitted on the following substantial question of law :

Whether on account of misreading, misappreciation and misconstruction of the law and facts as well as the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the judgment and decree under challenge in the main appeal being perverse and vitiated is not legally sustainable ?

Post admission notices to respondents No.3, 4, 5 & 7 returnable within eight weeks, on taking steps within a week.

CMP No.1074 of 2016 :

Heard. Having gone through the contents of this application and the reply thereto filed on behalf of the respondents/defendants, it is deemed appropriate that the interim order passed in this application on 4.3.2016 should be made absolute. The application is allowed. Consequently, the respondents/defendants are restrained from changing the nature of the suit land, selling, alienating or encumbering the same in any manner whatsoever, during the pendency of the appeal. The application stands accordingly disposed of.

(Dharam Chand Chaudhary), Judge

April 19, 2016 (CS)