Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Sanjay Kumar Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Ajay Kumar Gupta – Respondent
ORDER :
EX. APPL. (OS) 550/2025
1. The present application has been filed by the Judgment Debtor No.1 seeking necessary directions against the Decree Holder for non-compliance of the order dated 12.03.2025.
2. Learned counsel for the Judgment Debtor No. 1 states that under the Conciliated Agreement dated 20.12.2019, the Plot No. 635, Sector-22-B, Palam Vihar, Gurugram, Haryana (‘Gurugram property’ or ‘Plot no. 635’) has fallen to the share of Judgment Debtor No. 1:
2.1. He states that the Judgment Debtor No. 1 has approached HUDA for executing title documents and mutating the said Gurugram Property in his favor, on the basis of the settlement.
2.2. He states that Plot no. 635 was allotted to deceased i.e., late Dr. Hemlata Gupta. He states that as per the terms of allotment deceased had to carry out minimum construction in the plot. He states that the deceased failed to carry out construction and this has led to imposition of penalties by HUDA on the allottee.
2.3. He states that penalty to the extent of Rs. 50 lakhs is outstanding as on the date.
2.4. He states that the Decree Holder learnt about the quantum of the penalty after the filing of the present execution petition.
2.5. He states
All legal heirs must share latent liabilities, such as property penalties, to ensure clear title transfer under a conciliated agreement.
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.
A consent decree's terms are binding and must be executed as agreed; fraudulent transfers to evade obligations are voidable under the Transfer of Property Act.
Imposition of penalty must be in accordance with the law, and even a single rupee of penalty cannot be imposed against a citizen except as permitted by law.
Court confirms non-deduction of commission from deposits and emphasizes compliance with procedural mandates in execution of decrees while outlining parties' responsibilities.
Consent decrees asserting pre-existing rights do not constitute conveyance under the Indian Stamp Act, hence exempt from stamp duty.
The absence of a time limit in a decree allows the decree-holder to execute it at any time, emphasizing judicial interpretation favoring the decree-holder's rights.
The absence of a specified time limit in a decree allows the decree-holder to deposit the required amount at any time, affirming the principle that interpretations favoring the decree-holder should b....
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
