Lakhi Ram And Ors vs. Satender Kumar And Ors
Facts
The petitioners, Lakhi Ram and others, filed a revision petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging an order dated 20.09.2022. This order dismissed their application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC. The underlying suit was filed in 2021, and the revision petition in 2022. The judgment notes that there was no interim order in favour of the petitioners and that the trial court must have made significant progress in the suit. The petitioners' counsel stated that their appointed advocate, Mr. Shubham Jain, had been appointed as a member of the GST Appellate Tribunal and was no longer in touch with them.
Held
The High Court disposed of the present revision petition. The court noted that the petitioners' counsel had requested the disposal of the petition with liberty to revive it. This request was made because their appointed advocate, Mr. Shubham Jain, had been appointed as a member of the GST Appellate Tribunal and was not in touch with the petitioners. The court granted this liberty to the petitioners, allowing them to revive the revision petition if they wished to pursue it further or if any cause of action survived. The court directed the registry to send a copy of the order to the petitioners. No specific finding was given on the merits of the order dated 20.09.2022 dismissing the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
Key Issues
1. Whether the application filed by the petitioners under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC was rightly dismissed by the trial court? Petitioner's contention: The petitioners sought the disposal of the revision petition with liberty to revive it. This was based on the fact that their counsel, Mr. Shubham Jain, had been appointed as a member of the GST Appellate Tribunal and was no longer in contact with them. They implicitly argued that pursuing the revision petition was no longer feasible under these circumstances. Revenue/State's contention: No arguments were recorded for the respondents (Satender Kumar and others) as none appeared before the court.
Sections Cited
Order 7 Rule 11, Section 151 CPC
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
CR-5477-2022 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (283) CR-5477-2022 Date of decision: - 29.01.2026 Lakhi Ram and others ....Petitioners Versus Satender Kumar and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL Present:- Mr. Akshat Dalal, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondents. **** VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dated 20.09.2022 (Annexure P-5) vide which the application filed by the petitioners under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC has been dismissed. The suit is of the year 2021 and the present revision petition was filed in the year 2022 and a perusal of the zimni orders would show that there is no interim order in favour of the petitioners and in the said circumstances, prima facie, the trial Court must have made much progress.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that Mr. Shubham Jain, Advocate has been appointed as member of the GST Appellate Tribunal and he is not in touch with the petitioners and has thus submitted that the present revision petition be disposed of but NARESH KUMAR 2026.01.31 10:17 I attest to th
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.