SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Del) 324

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J.
IN THE MATTER OF: 
Jyotsna Bedi Through Spa Holder Neelmani Singh D/o Late Sh. J.S. Bedi - Appellant 
Versus 
Tikka Brijinder Singh Bedi S/o Late Sh. J.S. Bedi - Respondents 
EX.P. 28/2024 and EX.APPL.(OS) 595/2024
Decided on : 03-09-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr.Giriraj Subramanium, Mr.Prayj Sharma and Mr.Jaisal Baath, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Krishna Datta, Mr.Zeeshan Diwan, Mr.Harsh, Mr.Joel James and Ms.Ankita, Advocates.

Executing courts are bound to adhere strictly to the terms of a consent decree and cannot entertain objections that do not directly affect its executability.

Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure Code - Section 47 - Execution of consent decree - Judgment debtor's objections to execution proceedings deemed baseless and intended to delay proceedings - Previous agreement does not affect the terms of the decree, which must be executed as per its tenor - Court emphasizes that objections to decrees must impact executability. (Paras 22-25)

Facts of the case:
This execution petition arises from a consent judgment dated 30.01.2024, where parties agreed on property inheritance conditions under a MoU. Subsequent objections by the judgment debtor were filed citing a 2019 agreement supposedly altering the parties' rights. (Paras 1, 3, 4)

Findings of Court:
The court determined that the objections do not impact the decree's executability, affirming that the decree is binding as per its terms without regard for the objections raised. (Paras 24-27)

Issues: Whether objections based on a 2019 agreement could affect the execution of the consent decree. (Paras 4, 10, 12)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that execution must proceed per the decree's specific terms; external agreements prior to or during litigation do not alter the obligation to execute the decree. (Paras 16-18)

Result: Objections overruled; execution proceedings to continue.

Table of Content
1. judgment debtor's objections to execution (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 10 , 11)
2. court’s interpretation of objections (Para 8 , 9 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
3. obligations of executing court (Para 22 , 23 , 24)
4. continued execution of decree (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30)

JUDGMENT :

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J.

The instant execution petition has arisen out of the consent judgment and decree dated 30.01.2024 passed by this Court in CS(OS) 52/2024, whereunder, the said suit was decreed as per the terms contained in the Agreement-Arrangement cum Memorandum of Understanding dated 07.08.1992 (MoU). 2. The terms of the said MoU as recorded in the decree sought to be executed herein, are reproduced below, for reference:

"1. That all parties undertake to abide by the wish of the parties No. 1 and 2.

2. That Party No. 1 has written a WILL xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx dated 19th January 9 1 which is unregistered and he has under this will bequeathed his property 132, Golf Link to his son Tikka Brijinder Singh Bedi with the proviso that 1st Floor and 2nd Floor will be in possession of party No.2 Mrs. Swarn Kaur Bedi for her life time. Under this Arrangement all parties endorse this WILL of Party No. 1. In the event of premature death of Party No: 3 Tikka Brijinder Singh Bedi the property shall pass on to his son Tikka Angad Singh Bedi.

3. That now all parties have further decided that Party No . 3 will inherit the property of Party No. 1 namely 132, Golf Links, New Delhi. 1st Floor and 2nd Floor of the same shall remain in the possession of Party No. 2 for her residential use for her life time. She may rent out flat on 2nd Floor and enjoy the rental of the same.

4. That after the Life time of Party No . 2 the possession of the First Floor of the said property shall be given back to Party No. 3, Tikka Brijinder Singh Bedi or in the event of his premature death, to his son Tikka Angad Singh Bedi. That party No. 2 shall not part with possession of 1st Floor Flat except to Party No. 3 or his son.

5. That the 2nd Floor Flat shall be given to Ms.Jyotsna Bedi for her residential use for her life time. Thereafter the possession shall revert back to Tikka Brijinder Singh Bedi or to Tikka Angad Singh Bedi in the event of death of Tikka Brijinder Singh Bedi.

6. That party No. 7 shall have no right to part with or handover possession of the same i.e. 2nd Floor Flat to anybody else other than party No. 3 or his son. However party No. 3 cannot sell the Building 132, Golf Links without explicit written permission of Party No. 7.

7. That it is specifically agreed that Party No. 7 shall keep the Flat only for her personal use and only for her life till time. The title of the same shall remain in the name of Tikka B.S. Bedi (Party No.3) or Tikka Angad Singh Bedi as the case may be.

8. That Party No. 7 shall have no right to will the flat to anybody.

9. That it is also agreed that Party No. 3 shall improve the Flat by painting, repairing etc. before handing over to Party No. 7. Party No. 3 will renovate the flat by adding one more Bedroom and one Bathroom to the existing flat and make it into a Two Bedroom Drawing Dining Flat.

10. That it is also agreed that when the ownership of the property passes on to party No. 3 he shall bear all Municipal Taxes of the property.

11. That currently the property is under equitable mortgage with Punjab Sindh Bank. This Liability to be cleared by Party No. (illegible).

12. All parties agree to the above arrangement which it is also explicitly agreed is to be irrevocable and cannot be changed.

13. Any dispute arising between the parties relating to the aforesaid arrangement will be settled by a mutually agreed Arbitrator."

3. The judgment debtor has filed objections to the present proceedings under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "CPC‟), on various grounds.

4. Mr. Giriraj Subramaniam, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the decree-holder, submits

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top