IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 215 M/s Ascend Greater Ludh CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. concurrent judgments and decrees of both the Courts below whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff for permanent injunction was dismissed. 2. instructions been removed by dispute, therefore, he may appeal. 3. aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the appellant. 4. 5. 6. 26.05.2025 rishu IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA Date of Decision: dTelecom Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Versus Greater Ludhiana Area Development Authority & Anr. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Ashish Grover, Advocate for the respondents. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The plaintiff-appellant is in second appeal against the concurrent judgments and decrees of both the Courts below whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff for permanent injunction was dismissed. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant instructions submits that offending Telecommunication Tower has already been removed by the appellant-Telecom Company from the land in dispute, therefore, he may be permitted to withdraw the Learned counsel for the respondents ha aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the appellant. Permitted to do so. Dismissed as withdrawn. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. .2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-5952-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.05.2025 Telecom Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. .… Appellant na Area Development Authority & Anr. .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Ashish Grover, Advocate for the respondents. appellant is in second appeal against the concurrent judgments and decrees of both the Courts below whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff for permanent injunction was dismissed. learned counsel for the appellant on offending Telecommunication Tower has already Telecom Company from the land in be permitted to withdraw the instant second Learned counsel for the respondents has not disputed the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the appellant. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Yes/No appellant is in second appeal against the concurrent judgments and decrees of both the Courts below whereby the on offending Telecommunication Tower has already Telecom Company from the land in instant second s not disputed the RISHU KATARIA 2025.05.27 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.