The court confirmed that when a petition is dismissed as infructuous owing to events such as disposal of the main proceedings below, no legal question is decided and no new law is created or clarified; such orders hold no precedential value.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CR/6896/2025 of KIRTI Vs HARMANJIT SINGH AND OTHERS |
| CNR | PHHC011559702025 |
| Date of Registration | 24-09-2025 |
| Decision Date | 28-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED |
| Judgment Author | MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Precedent Value | None (Does not decide any legal question) |
| Type of Law | Civil Procedure |
| Questions of Law | None decided; petition dismissed as infructuous |
| Ratio Decidendi | The petition was dismissed as infructuous because the execution petition before the lower court had already been dismissed in default; accordingly, there was no surviving cause for the revision. No legal question was adjudicated upon. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The revision petition was filed against orders of the Executing Court. During the pendency of the revision, the execution petition was dismissed in default, resulting in the instant petition becoming infructuous. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | Not binding; no law was declared or clarified. |
| Persuasive For | No persuasive value; does not address any legal principle. |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Where a petition is dismissed as infructuous due to events such as disposal of the main proceedings before the lower court, no question of law is decided.
- Such orders cannot be cited as precedent or authoritative guidance on substantive legal questions.
- Lawyers should not rely on such orders for arguing on merits; only orders dealing with substantive issues carry precedential weight.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court noted that the execution petition, which was the subject of the revision, had already been dismissed in default by the Executing Court.
- As a result, the cause of action for the revision petition no longer survived.
- The court accordingly dismissed the revision petition as having become infructuous, without delving into the merits or addressing any legal question.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Submitted, through counsel, that in view of the execution petition having been dismissed by the Executing Court in default, the present revision petition has become infructuous.
Respondent
- No submissions recorded in the judgment.
Factual Background
The petitioner filed a revision petition challenging proceedings in an execution petition before the Executing Court. Subsequently, the execution petition was dismissed in default by the Executing Court itself. Because the original cause of action ceased to exist, the petitioner, through counsel, stated that the revision petition had become infructuous.
Statutory Analysis
No statutory provisions were interpreted or analyzed, as the petition was dismissed as infructuous on account of the disposal of the execution petition in default by the lower court.
Alert Indicators
- Precedent Followed – Dismissal of infructuous petitions without deciding legal issues is a routine procedural order; no changes to existing law.