Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VIRINDER AGGARWAL
Raghbir Singh – Appellant
Versus
Surender Kumar Alias Kalu Ram – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J.
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the order dated 28.07.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Executing Court in the execution proceedings. By way of the said order, the Executing Court dismissed the petitioner’s application dated 15.07.2025 (Annexure P-6), which sought a stay on the execution of the judgment and decree dated 20.05.2025, during the pendency of the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the said judgment and decree. The petitioner contends that the application was wrongly rejected despite the fact that the appeal is pending adjudication and raises arguable issues.
2. The petitioner alleges that application dated 20.06.2025 (Annexure P-5) along with appeal was preferred before the learned Appellate Court for staying the executing proceedings. The learned Appellate Court refused to decide the stay application despite repeated requests. The petitioner filed application dated 16.07.2025 bearing 1A-01 of 2025 for taking up the appeal file at an early date and for deciding the stay application. The Appellate Court vide order dated 18.07.2025 (Annexure P
A stay of execution in civil proceedings can be granted during the pendency of an appeal when sufficient cause is shown, pursuant to Order 21 Rule 26 of the CPC.
The Executing Court may dismiss a stay application made incorrectly; an ex-parte decree is valid until set aside in the originating court.
The executing court cannot stay execution of its own decree; such authority lies with the appellate court.
Order 21 Rule 29 CPC applies only when both the execution proceedings and the suit between the decree-holder and judgment debtor are pending before the same Court. Section 151 CPC cannot be used to s....
Mere pendency of an appeal does not stay execution proceedings unless explicitly ordered by the appellate court, as per Order 41 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The main legal point established is that the pendency of a second appeal does not automatically warrant a stay of execution proceedings, and the High Court's jurisdiction to pass interim orders is co....
Stay of execution under O.21 R.29 CPC requires extraordinary circumstances and cannot be granted based on ordinary claims without substantial proof.
The court has the jurisdiction to issue a direction for the parties to file details of their assets under Order XXI Rule 26 of the CPC.
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
