Sadhu Singh v. Sukhdev Singh
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
With these observations, the petition stands disposed of
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 227
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 O. 39 rr. 1, 2
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present : Mr. RPS Cheema, Advocate, for the petitioner. AJAY TEWARI J.(Oral) **** The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set-aside the order dated 21.05.2011 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Moga, whereby application of the petitioner under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for restraining the respondent from alienating the property in dispute was dismissed. The petitioner also prays for setting-aside the order dated
Operative part
09.01.2012 (Annexure P-2) whereby the appeal filed against the aforesaid order has been dismissed by learned Addl. District Judge, Moga. At the out set, learned counsel for the petitioner states that as regards the property within the share of the respondent, there can be no restraint but no co-sharer can be permitted to sell the property beyond his share. Learned lower Court in its order dated 21.05.2011 has categorically mentioned that the respondent is entitled to sell his Civil Revision No. 4034 of 2012(O&M) [2] share in the property in dispute. Obviously, necessary implication is that the respondent cannot sell more than his share in the property in dispute. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, I do not find any infirmity in the orders passed by both the Courts below. With these observations, the petition stands disposed of.
29.08.2012 'ravinder' (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With these observations, the petition stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 227; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — O. 39 rr. 1, 2.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 29 Aug 2012. The bench was AJAY TEWARI.
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.