Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 36323 (PNJ)

P.R.T.C. v. MAGHAR SINGH ETC.

RSA/1388/1999 · 2025-04-29

Vikas Bahl

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

RSA-1388-1999 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH *** RSA-1388-1999 Date of decision : 29.04.2025 Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, Head Office Patiala ... Appellant Versus Maghar Singh and another ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL Present: Mr.Anupam Singla, Advocate and Ms.Deepika Bagri, Advocate for the appellant. None for the respondents. VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL) 1. Respondent no.1-plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration to the effect that the order dated 29.06.1993 passed by respondent no.2 and conveyed to the plaintiff vide letter dated 29.06.1993 retiring the plaintiff from the service is illegal, null and void. The said suit was decreed. The appeal filed by the present appellant was partly allowed with the observation that the plaintiff was entitled to all the benefits of service rendered upto 29.06.1993. Only the present appellant has filed the appeal against the said judgment and decree and no appeal has been filed by the plaintiff. 2. A perusal of the paper book would show that on 05.11.1999, the operation of the judgment and decree was stayed by a Coordinate Bench Davinder Kumar 2025.05.01 17:29 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order / judgment RSA-1388-1999 2 of this Court and thereafter the matter was admitted and the interim order had been continued. None has appeared on behalf of the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that no one on behalf of respondent no.1 has approached the concerned office to seek enforcement of the judgment and decree of the Ist Appellate Court and has submitted that the present appeal be disposed of at this stage but liberty be granted to the appellant to revive the same in case respondent no.1 seeks to enforce the judgment of the Ist Appellate Court or file execution. 4. In view of the above, the present appeal is disposed of at this stage with the aforesaid liberty. Liberty is also granted to respondent no.1, if any cause survives. (VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE April 29, 2025. Davinder Kumar Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Davinder Kumar 2025.05.01 17:29 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order / judgment