SWARAN KAUR vs JAGDISH RAM AND ORS. — RSA/598/1995

Case under No Acts Defined. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 15th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010369681995

Filing Number

RSA/598/1995

Filing Date

05-May-5500

Registration No

RSA/598/1995

Registration Date

05-May-5500

Judge

Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta

Coram

Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta

Bench Type

Single

Category

26 - RSA ( 496 )

Sub-Category

( 944 )

Judicial Branch

CIVIL II(RSA) BRANCH

Decision Date

15-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

No Acts Defined

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SWARAN KAUR

    Adv. L.N. VERMA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.JAGDISH RAM AND ORS.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-May-5500

    Case filed

    Registration No. RSA/598/1995

  3. 15-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Deepak GuptaView PDF

    Case Summary: RSA/598/1995 - Swaran Kaur v. Jagdish Ram The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed Swaran Kaur's pre-emption suits against land sales, finding the foundational decree establishing her co-sharership status was collusive. The court determined that a 1990 decree creating her property rights was deliberately engineered to defeat prior contractual rights of the defendants-vendees, making it void as to third parties. Additionally, the suits suffered from non-impleadment of necessary vendors and failure to prove notice requirements, rendering the pre-emption claims unenforceable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: RSA/598/1995 - Swaran Kaur v. Jagdish Ram The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed Swaran Kaur's pre-emption suits against land sales, finding the foundational decree establishing her co-sharership status was collusive. The court determined that a 1990 decree creating her property rights was deliberately engineered to defeat prior contractual rights of the defendants-vendees, making it void as to third parties. Additionally, the suits suffered from non-impleadment of necessary vendors and failure to prove notice requirements, rendering the pre-emption claims unenforceable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case