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
| 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
AI
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.
Execution of joint decrees remains valid even with subsequent transfers of interest by decree-holders, and a judgment-debtor cannot escape execution by claiming ownership.
The Executing Court cannot modify the terms of a decree but must execute it according to its original tenor, as established in Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
A purely declaratory decree that creates a fresh lease is non-executable; ejectment requires a separate suit per law.
One joint decree-holder may apply for execution for the benefit of all unless expressly stated otherwise; courts can assess intent beyond strict decree wording.
The executing court must determine questions arising between parties to the decree without modifying it, and procedural irregularities should not defeat substantive rights.
The executing court cannot re-evaluate settled issues or entertain objections based on the merits of the original case; it must execute the decree as it stands.
The executing court is bound by the decree's terms and cannot entertain objections that do not pertain to jurisdiction, even if the decree is allegedly erroneous.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.