Back
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, MANOJ MISRA
Sanjay Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Umesh Gupta – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Application seeking permission to file Special Leave Petition is granted.
2. Leave granted.
3. The present appeal is against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi in OMP (ENF.) (COMM) No. 127 of 2022 dated 12.09.2024.
4. The short facts are that one M/s. Medipol Pharmaceutical India Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter “Medipol”) was incorporated in the year 1992, in which the appellant is one of the shareholder. Respondent no. 1 and respondent no. 2, who are brothers, are holders of majority of the equity share capital. Respondent no. 1 also controls another proprietorship by the name JP Industries.
5. In 2021, disputes arose between respondent no.1 and respondent no. 2 in relation to ownership and functioning of various entities owned by them. On the intervention of family members and friends, a deed of separation (alleged consent award) dated 01.08.2021 was passed between them, vide which control of Medipol was to go to respondent no. 1 and JP Industries, with all its assets and liabilities would go to respondent no. 2. Before finalization of terms of settlement, respondent no. 1 chose to obtain ownership of JP Industries and respondent no. 2 was to take over Medipol.
The court set aside unjustified interim directions from the High Court, emphasizing the need for balanced treatment of all parties in execution proceedings.
The court reinforced that obstruction claims in execution proceedings must be heard to uphold rights, ensuring adherence to natural justice principles.
A party must provide valid reasons for any delay in filing applications and demonstrate the relevance of evidence to the case, as per the procedural rules under the CPC.
A person claiming independent right, title or interest in the property can resist delivery of possession even by filing an objection under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC in the executing court itself and if th....
The objections raised by third parties in execution proceedings must fall within the scope of the proceedings under Order 21 Rules 97 to 103 of the CPC and cannot be decided in execution proceedings ....
Court executing decree shall determine all questions arising between parties to suit or their representatives in relation to execution, discharge, or satisfaction of decree and such questions may not....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
