Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 25689 (PNJ)

BIR BHAN AND OTHERS v. ROSHNI DEVI

CR/4768/2026 · 2026-07-01

Harsh Bunger

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APURVA 2026.07.03 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh APURVA 2026.07.03 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh 3. APURVA 2026.07.03 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh 7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to contend that the suit property and the alleged gali do not, in fact, exist and that the documents relied upon by the respondent/plaintiff to establish her ownership are not reliable. However, this Court is of the considered view that the aforesaid pleas raise disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon while deciding an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Such issues can only be gone into after the parties lead their respective evidence during the course of trial. Likewise, the correctness or otherwise of the averments made in the plaint also cannot be examined at this stage, as the Court is required APURVA 2026.07.03 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh I see no illegality or perversity therein 10. APURVA 2026.07.03 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh