The judgment debtor's objections were dismissed, and the court found the transfer of property to be fraudulent, emphasizing the importance of fulfilling the terms of the settlement and decree.

JUDGMENT :

Amit bansal, J.

1. The present execution petition has been filed seeking execution of the decree passed by this Court on 14th December, 2018 in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

2. By way of the present execution proceedings, the decree holder seeks the following directions against the judgment debtor:

(i) The Judgment debtor be directed to surrender vacant and peaceful possession of the entire first floor of the property bearing No.14, Eastern Avenue, Maharani Bagh, New Delhi-110065 to the decree holder (Maharani Bagh Property).

(ii) Direct judgment debtor to pay a sum of Rs.4,00,00,000/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from 14th June, 2019 till the date of payment.

3. Notice in the execution petition was issued on 16th December, 2021. The objections have been filed by the Judgment Debtor on 24th February, 2022 and the decree holder has filed a reply to the objections.

4. It was noted in the order dated 23rd December, 2021 that the judgment debtor, without prejudice to his rights and contentions, shall vacate the first floor of the Maharani Bagh property on or before 14th February, 2022. As noted in the order dated 25th February, 2022, the possession of the first floor of the Maharani Bagh property has been handed over to the decree holder.

5. Counsels for the parties have been heard in respect of the objections filed by the judgment debtor on 13th July, 2022 and today. The written submissions have been filed on behalf of the decree holder.

6. The decree of which the execution is sought was a consent decree passed by this Court on 14th December, 2018 after recording the statement of the decree holder and the judgment debtor. The relevant terms of the settlement as recorded in the statement of the decree holder are set out below:

“(i) The right, title and interest in the immovable property along with superstructure located at 14, Easter Avenue, Maharani Bagh, New Delhi-110065 (in short ‘Maharani Bagh’) would vest in me.

(ii) Mr. Girish Peshoria would surrender possession of the first floor of Maharani Bagh property. The possession of the first floor will be handed over to me within six months from today.

(iii) The right, title and interest in the factory shed along with the land underneath which is located at 14/5, Mathura Road, Faridabad (in short ‘Faridabad property’) will vest in Mr. Girish Peshoria.

(iv) Mr. Girish Peshoria will pay a sum of Rs.4 crores (Rs. Four Crores) to me within six months from today. The said sum of Rs.4 crores will be secured by Mr. Girish Peshoria by furnishing a Post-Dated Cheque (PDC) for an equivalent amount within five days from today.

(v) In case, a need arises to encash the PDC and on presentation, it is dishonoured, interest at the rate of 18% per annum will run on the sum of Rs. 4 crores from the date the PDC is dishonoured.

(vi) In case any tax, charge, cess or liability of any nature is payable qua the Maharani Bagh property and the Faridabad property, which would include liability towards creditors and statutory authorities, which are due and payable as of today and those which may accrue hereafter, the same will be paid by the person in whom the right, title and interest in the property enures as per the instant settlement. In other words, insofar as Maharani Bagh property is concerned, the liability will be borne by me, while the liability with regard to Faridabad property will be borne by Mr. Girish Peshoria.

(vii) Both Mr. Girish Peshoria and myself will execute relinquishment deeds with respect to the said two properties qua which right, title and interest is given up by the other. In other words, I would execute a relinquishment deed vis-à-vis the Faridabad property while Mr. Girish Peshoria will execute a relinquishment deed in my favour in respect of the Maharani Bagh property. Respective relinquishment deeds will be registered within one month from today.”

7. Mr. Rajat Aneja, the counsel for the judgment debtor submits that in terms of the aforesaid settlem