Back
ANIL KSHETARPAL
Darshan Singh – Appellant
Versus
Chatinder Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. termination of proceedings due to non-acceptance of summons. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. background of decree ownership and dispossession. (Para 3) |
| 3. consideration of objections and counsel submissions. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. disposition of the revision petition and related applications. (Para 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT
Mr. Anil Kshetarpal, J. (Oral)
As per the office report, notice issued to respondent No.1 has been received back with the report that he had refused to accept the summons.
2. In view of the aforesaid, he is proceeded ex parte.
3. The petitioner is a judgment debtor in a suit for grant of decree of declaration that was decreed on 04.11.2014, to the effect that the respondents are owner of house measuring 18 Marlas and 167 sq. ft. The trial Court granted a decree after finding that the defence of the petitioner has no substance. Thereafter, the respondents (decree holders) filed an application for executing the decree under Order XXI Rule 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, while alleging that they have been dispossessed from the house after the decree was passed. The objection petition was filed by the petitioner (judgment debtor), which has been dismissed by the Execu
The court clarified that any relief claimed in the plaint, which is not expressly granted, shall be deemed to have been refused, and emphasized the importance of clarity about the respective shares i....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the enforceability of the decree under section 47 and section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, and the consequences of permissive possession ....
Execution courts can issue possession warrants under CPC for violations of permanent injunctions based on established possession findings.
The duty of the Executing Court to ensure that the decree-holder is put in possession of the property, the subservient rights of subsequent purchasers to the rights of the judgment debtor, and the ne....
The petitioner failed to prove illegal dispossession under Order XXI Rule 32 CPC, leading to the dismissal of her application for execution of the decree.
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.
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
