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

2008 Supreme(Raj) 583

DALIP SINGH
Rajendra Singh Bhandari – Appellant
Versus
Harpreet Singh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K. Pareek, for Petitioner; Rajeveer Sharma, for Respondents;

Honble SINGH, J.–This is a revision petition by the judgment debtor by which the objections filed by the judgment debtor- petitioner were dismissed by the impugned order dated 22.7.2006. The objection which has been raised is that the execution application was filed beyond the period of limitation as prescribed by Article 136 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

(2). A few salient facts may be taken note of. The plaintiff- respondent filed a suit for recovery of money being Civil Suit NO. 29/1990 which came to be decreed ex-parte on 5.10.1991. An application for setting aside the ex-parte decree came to be filed by the defendant on 14.10.1991 under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. in which there was also a prayer that the execution of the decree may be stayed. The aforesaid application was opposed by the plaintiff-decree holder and the learned trial Court by its order dated 10.12.1991 dismissed the said application.

(3). The learned trial Court after hearing the parties also dismissed the application filed under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. filed by the defendant-petitioner herein vide order dated 10.12.1991.

(4). It may be mentioned here that the plaintiff-decree holder consequent upon the dismissal of the





































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top