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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 3352

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manoj Jain, J
M/S UPPAL CHADHA HI-TECH DEVELOPERS PVT LTD – Appellant
Versus
RAJESH KUMAR PATWARI – Respondent
CM(M) 1094/2025 & CM APPL. 36811/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, Mr. Aman Nandrajog
For the Respondents: None

The court allows the petitioner to deposit the decretal amount and suspend execution while directing appropriate proceedings before the lower court.

Headnote:The judgment addresses an execution petition pending before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The court notes that the petitioner is willing to deposit the decretal amount and seeks temporary relief from warrants of attachment. Ultimately, the court directs the petitioner to file a suitable application within one week and to deposit the decretal amount within the same timeframe, keeping the warrants of attachment in abeyance until then. The relevant provisions for execution are acknowledged.

Table of Content
1. execution petition pending before the state commission. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. petitioner willing to deposit decretal amount. (Para 4)

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral)

1. Petitioner is facing an Execution Petition which is pending adjudication before the learned State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (in short “State Commission”).

2. Such Execution Petition i.e. E.A No. 16/2025 was taken up by learned State Commission on 23.04.2025 for the first time and noticing that the execution had been filed within two years, and after appreciating the relevant facts, the learned State Commission issued warrants of attachment of the property of the judgment debtor/petitioner.

3. Such order is under challenge.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner/judgment debtor has, at the very outset, submitted that the judgment debtor is ready and willing to deposit the entire decretal amount within one week from today before the learned State Signature Not Verified CM(M) 1094/2025 1 Digitally Signed Commission in the abovesaid Execution Petition.

5. When asked, learned counsel for petitioner/ judgment debtor submitted that no application in this regard was moved by them before the learned State Commission. Quite obviously, if the petitioner/ judgment debtor was inclined in depositing the decretal amount, instead of filing a petition here, it should have rather filed an application to said effect before the learned State Commission. There was no reason, whatsoever, for the learned State Commission to have not entertained any such request, even if, the next date in the said Execution was of 12.08.2025.

6. Learned counsel for petitioner/ judgment debtor submits that he would move appropriate application in this regard before the learned State Commission within one week from today and would also deposit the entire decretal amount within one week from today and request that in the order to enable him to take the abovesaid action, the warrants of attachment may be kept in abeyance till then.

7. None appears on behalf of respondent/decree holder despite advance notice.

8. Keeping in mind the specific statement and assurance given by the learned counsel for petitioner/ judgment debtor, the present petition is disposed of with direction to petitioner/judgment debtor to move appropriate application before the learned State Commission within one week. As and when, any such application is filed before the learned State Commission, after giving due opportunity of hearing to both the sides, shall decide the same, in accordance with law.

9. Simultaneously, the entire decretal amount be also deposited by the petitioner/ judgment debtor before the learned State Commission within one Signature Not Verified CM(M) 1094/2025 2 Digitally Signed week from today. In order to enable the petitioner / judgment debtor to take the abovesaid action and to deposit the decretal amount, the warrants of attachment dated 23.04.2025 are kept in abeyance till then.

10. Petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

11. Pending application also stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

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 Back to top