Shamsher Singh Sani v. State of H.P & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
The Hon(cid:146)ble Mr.Justice V K Gupta, C.J. The Hon(cid:146)ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Advocate. For Respondents No.1&2: Mr. M.S. Chandel, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General. V.K. Gupta, C.J. (Oral) Petitioner(cid:146)s limited grievance is that the application filed by him under Section 118 of the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972, pending with respondent No.2 has not been disposed of despite the fact that more than four years have elapsed since the application was filed. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? - 2 - After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of this writ petition at this stage, by directing respondent No.2 to dispose of the aforesaid pending application on its own merits in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner, latest by
31.3.2007. CMPs No.1004 and 1005 of 2006. Infructuous. (V K Gupta ), C J. 14th September, 2006 (Surjit Singh),J. (D)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972 — s. 118.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Himachal Pradesh High Court, on 14 Sep 2006. The bench was SURJIT SINGH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.