Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Varandeep Singh And Others vs Prem Nath And Others on 9 October, 2013

Author: K. Kannan

Bench: K. Kannan

            CR No. 6179 of 2013                                     1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

                                                   CR No. 6179 of 2013
                                              Date of decision October 9, 2013

            Varandeep Singh and others
                                                              ....... Petitioners
                                              Versus


            Prem Nath and others
                                                              ........ Respondents

            CORAM:                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

            Present:-              Mr. Liaqat Ali, Advocate
                                   for the petitioners.

                                        ****

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

2. To be referred to the reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?

K. Kannan, J (oral).

1. The objection is taken by third parties who were the sons and daughters of the judgment debtor Sita Devi. The decree which was put in execution was an order of ejectment passed in favour of the decree holders who claimed that the property had been rented out to the judgment debtor by rent note dated 27.2.2002 and that she had not paid rent from 1.9.2002. After the decree was passed when it was put in execution, it appears that the judgment debtor raised an objection which was rejected. Subsequently the third parties who are sons and daughters of the judgment debtor have filed objections claiming that they are co-sharers in respect of the property. The court observed that the issue of title at the time Archana Arora 2013.10.11 15:34 I am the author of this document High Court Chandigarh CR No. 6179 of 2013 2 when the property is put in execution pursuant to an order of ejectment was untenable and it was an obvious collusive act trying to scuttle a decree passed against their mother. There appears to be already a title suit already pending between the parties. The petitioners are entitled to press for any interim orders for stay of execution, if they could make out a case of prima facie consideration of title and possession in the suit. The institution of suit already must be taken as an election of a remedy and they shall not again vex the decree holder with objections in the execution petition. The dismissal of the execution will not debar the objectors from seeking for an adjudication possible in law in the civil suit.

2. With these observations the revision petition is disposed off.

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE October 9 , 2013 archana Archana Arora 2013.10.11 15:34 I am the author of this document High Court Chandigarh