Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

1924 DAILYLAW 2 (PNJ)

BALWINDER SINGH v. SATNAM SINGH AND OTHERS

CR/1924/2021 · 2026-01-30

Vikas Bahl

body1924

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CR No.1924 of 2021 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 109 Civil Revision No.1924 of 2021 Date of decision: January 30th, 2026 Balwinder Singh .....Petitioner Versus Satnam Singh and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL Present: Mr. Rajiv Joshi and Ms. Jaswinder Kaur, Advocates for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Thakur, Advocate for the respondents. VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL) 1. This is a civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 10.08.2021 passed by the Additional District Judge, Jalandhar, whereby the appeal filed by the respondents/defendants has been allowed 2. On 15.09.2021, a coordinate Bench of this Court was pleased to pass the following order: “Present: Mr. Rajiv Joshi, Advocate, for the petitioner. (Presence marked through video conference). Notice of motion for 21.12.2021. Status quo qua suit property shall be maintained by the parties till the next date of hearing. 15.09.2021” 3. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that the case is PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.01.30 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CR No.1924 of 2021 2 now fixed for defendants’ evidence and the said interim order of status quo has been continuing since 2021 and thus, it has been jointly stated that the present revision petition be disposed of by directing the trial Court to decide the suit as expeditiously as possible and by continuing the order of status quo qua the suit property till the final adjudication of the case. It has further been stated that the grant and continuance of the said status quo order should not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the trial Court be directed to decide the suit independently, in accordance with law. 4. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances and the fair stand taken by the counsel for the petitioner as well as counsel for the respondents, the present revision petition is disposed of with a request to the trial Court to decide the suit which is pending since 2020 as expeditiously as possible. The interim order of status quo qua suit property, as was ordered on 15.09.2021, would continue till the time the suit is decided. The grant and continuance of the said interim order shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and it would be open to the parties to raise all pleas at the time of final adjudication and the trial Court would decide the same independently. January 30th, 2026 (VIKAS BAHL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.01.30 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh