JAGDSIH RAM L.N. VERMA, ASHOK VERMA vs SMT SWARAN KAUR — RSA/742/1995

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

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010370301995

Filing Number

RSA/742/1995

Filing Date

05-May-1995

Registration No

RSA/742/1995

Registration Date

05-May-5500

Judge

Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta

Coram

Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta

Bench Type

Single

Category

500.56 - APPL FILED BY OWNER AND DRIVER ( 921 )

Judicial Branch

CIVIL II(RSA) BRANCH

Decision Date

15-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

No Acts Defined

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JAGDSIH RAM L.N. VERMA, ASHOK VERMA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SMT SWARAN KAUR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Deepak GuptaView PDF

    Case Summary: RSA 742/1995 (Jagdish Ram v. Smt. Swaran Kaur) The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Smt. Swaran Kaur's pre-emption suits, holding that the 1990 decree granting her co-sharer status was collusive and engineered to defeat prior contractual rights of the defendants-vendees. The court found the decree's timing (after an agreement to sell but before execution), lack of revenue record reflection, and close familial relationships among parties demonstrated intent to artificially create pre-emption rights rather than settle genuine pre-existing claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-May-1995

    Case filed

    Registration No. RSA/742/1995

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: RSA 742/1995 (Jagdish Ram v. Smt. Swaran Kaur) The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Smt. Swaran Kaur's pre-emption suits, holding that the 1990 decree granting her co-sharer status was collusive and engineered to defeat prior contractual rights of the defendants-vendees. The court found the decree's timing (after an agreement to sell but before execution), lack of revenue record reflection, and close familial relationships among parties demonstrated intent to artificially create pre-emption rights rather than settle genuine pre-existing claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case