Dayal Singh vs Avtar Singh And Another on 27 August, 2013

[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Dayal Singh vs Avtar Singh And Another on 27 August, 2013

Bench: Paramjeet Singh

         CR No.1164 of 2012                                 1



         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH

                                       CR No.1164 of 2012 (O & M)
                                  Date of Decision: August 27, 2013.


Dayal Singh

                                                            ....Petitioner

                                Versus

Avtar Singh and another

                                                         .....Respondents



CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH


1)       Whether reporters of the 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?


Present: Mrs. Jagroop-wife and Ms. Gursaran-daughter of the
         petitioner.

         Mr. Divanshu Jain, Advocate,
         for respondent no.1.

                   ****

PARAMJEET SINGH, J. (Oral)

Instant revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 17.12.2011 (Annexure P-16) and order dated 14.01.2012 (Annexure P-17) passed by learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), SAS Nagar, Mohali in execution CR No.1164 of 2012 2 application arising from judgment and decree dated 10.12.2007 and sale deed prepared in pursuance to the order dated 14.1.2012.

I have heard learned counsel for respondent no.1 and perused the record.

On 12.07.2013, the following order was passed by this Court:

" Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that against the judgment and decree dated 10.12.2007, appeal has been preferred in the Court of Additional District Judge, Mohali and against the judgment of learned lower court, stay has not been granted, however, the petitioner has approached this Court against non- grant of stay by appellate court and this court has stayed the dispossession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon The Friends Cooperative House Building Society (Registered) vs. State of Haryana 2013 (3) RCR (Civil) 88 to contend that once the dispossession is stayed, then the entire execution shall be deemed to be stayed, so the impugned order is required to be stayed.

To come up for arguments on 27.08.2013. In the meantime, operation of the impugned order is stayed."

Mrs. Jagroop-wife and Ms. Gursaran-daughter of the petitioner are present in person and seek time. However, learned counsel for CR No.1164 of 2012 3 respondent no.1 has produced certified copy of order dated 19.08.2013 passed by learned Additional District Judge, SAS Nagar Mohali whereby appeal preferred by the petitioner against judgment and decree dated 10.12.2007 has been dismissed.

In view of this, the instant petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to avail any remedy that may be available to him in accordance with law.

(Paramjeet Singh) Judge August 27, 2013 parveen kumar

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court