GURMAIL SINGH AND ORS. GS PUNIA vs JOGA SINGH AND ORS, — RSA/2417/2004

Case under No Acts Defined. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 07-Mar-2005

CNR: PHHC010564042004

Filing Number

RSA/2417/2004

Filing Date

15-Aug-2207

Registration No

RSA/2417/2004

Registration Date

15-Aug-2207

Judge

Mr. Justice Virinder Aggarwal

Coram

Mr. Justice Virinder Aggarwal

Bench Type

Single

Category

77.5 - EXECUTION PETITION (COMMERCIAL) ( 253 )

Sub-Category

( 253 )

Judicial Branch

CIVIL II(RSA) BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

No Acts Defined

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GURMAIL SINGH AND ORS. GS PUNIA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.JOGA SINGH AND ORS,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Aug-2207

    Case filed

    Registration No. RSA/2417/2004

  3. 12-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Virinder AggarwalView PDF

    Case Summary: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed RSA 2417/2004, an appeal in a permanent injunction suit originally filed in 1997, for want of prosecution. Since neither party appeared before the court, Justice Virinder Aggarwal found that the parties had lost interest in pursuing the matter and that retaining it would serve no useful purpose. All pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 11-Aug-2006

    —

    Mr. Justice Baldev Singh

  5. 14-Jul-2006

    —

    Mr. Justice Baldev Singh

  6. 04-Oct-2005

    —

    Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh

  7. 27-Sep-2005

    —

    Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh

  8. 09-May-2005

    —

    Mr. Justice Ashutosh Mohunta

  9. 07-Mar-2005

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed RSA 2417/2004, an appeal in a permanent injunction suit originally filed in 1997, for want of prosecution. Since neither party appeared before the court, Justice Virinder Aggarwal found that the parties had lost interest in pursuing the matter and that retaining it would serve no useful purpose. All pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case