Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 14794
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Subramonium Prasad, J
SH. NAVEEN CHAUHAN – Appellant
Versus
SMT. RAJWATI & ORS. – Respondent
EX.APPL.(OS) 648/2026|EX.P. 17/2019|CCP(O) 19/2024|CCP(O) 30/2026|EX.APPL.(OS) 1221/2023|EX.APPL.(OS) 1565/2023|EX.APPL.(OS) 1393/2025|EX.APPL.(OS) 1520/2025|EX.APPL.(OS) 651/2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: In person
For the Respondents: R. K. Sonkiya
A party who participates in an agreed inter-se bidding process for property valuation in execution proceedings without raising any objections cannot subsequently seek re-determination of the value based on a valuation report to protract the proceedings.
Headnote:The matter involves an application filed under Section 151 and Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure to re-determine the market value of a property for the execution of a partition decree. A preliminary and final decree had previously ordered the partition of a flat via sale, providing an option for inter-se bidding. After a Local Commissioner conducted the bidding process and identified the highest bidder, the applicant sought a new valuation based on a government-approved valuer's report, alleging that the previous bid suppressed the actual market worth. The court found that the applicant had participated in the bidding process without any objection at any material stage. The primary issue is whether a party can seek re-valuation of a property after an agreed inter-se bidding process has concluded and the highest bidder has been identified. The court reasoned that inter-se bidding is a well-recognized mode for arriving at the value of a property, especially when it is an agreed procedure. The court observed that the applicant remained silent during the invitation, opening, and reporting of bids, and thus cannot now challenge the valuation to frustrate the realization of a decree passed over eight years ago. Consequently, the application is dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for re-valuation of property in execution of partition decree. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. execution of partition via agreed inter-se bidding process. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. estoppel and lack of bona fides in delaying execution proceedings. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. inter-se bidding as a valid and binding method for determining property value. (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. dismissal of dilatory applications with cost imposition. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT
EX.APPL.(OS) 648/2026
1. The present application has been filed by Sh. Naveen Chauhan (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Petitioner/Applicant’) under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure [“CPC”] read with Order XXI of the CPC for ascertaining proper, fair and just value of the Decretal Property at the prevailing market value for satisfying the decree.
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts leading to the filing of the present execution petition are as below:
a. A civil suit for partition and permanent injunction was filed on 12.07.2011. The dispute arose between the legal heirs of Late Sh. Ram Chandra Singh, who died intestate on 24.10.2004.
b. The parties to the present execution petition and the suit filed on 12.07.2011 were Smt. Rajwati, Wife of the deceased (Plaintiff No. 1/Decree Holder No. 1), Ms. Shashi Kumari, Daughter of the deceased (Plaintiff No. 2/Decree Holder No. 2), Sh. Rajkumar Chauhan, Son of the deceased (Defendant No. 1/Decree Holder No. 3) and Sh. Naveen Chauhan, Son of the deceased (Defendant No. 2/Decree Holder No. 4)
c. While the suit initially was filed concerning four properties, the primary focus of the execution and final decree is Property “B”, i.e. Flat No. 19-B, First Floor, DDA LIG Flat, Ber Sarai, near JNU, New Delhi
d. On 17.01.2018, a Preliminary and Final Decree was passed declaring that all the Decree Holders hold a 1/4th share in the Suit property. The Court ordered the partition by sale of the flat and distribution of the proceeds amongst all the parties, in the proportion of their respective shares. An option was provided to the parties for inter-se bidding, where the highest bidder would acquire the other shares by paying their value against a transfer deed. Relevant portions of the decree dated 17.01.2018 read as under:
“This suit coming on this day for final disposal before this Court in the presence of counsel for the parties-.as aforesaid; it is ordered that a preliminary decree for partition of Flat No.l9-B, First Floor, DDA Flat, Ber Sarai, new JNU, New Delhi be and the same is hereby passed declaring the two plaintiffs and the two defendants to be having 1/4th share each therein.
It is further ordered that a final decree for partition is also hereby passed of Flat No.l9-B, First Floor, DDA Flat, Ber Sarai, near JNU, New Delhi, by sale of the said flat and distribution of sale proceeds between the parties as per their shares declared in the preliminary decree for partition.
It is further ordered that the parties shall have the option of making inter se bids for purchase of share/s of other/s in the said flat. The party bidding the highest would be entitled to acquire the share/s of the other/s by payment of value of the share/s of the others against execution of transfer deed.
It is further ordered that to ensure that there is no delay in the parties executing the final decree for partition with respect to the subject property, besides 50% of the rent .of the said property already ordered to be paid .to the plaintiff No.1, the balance 50% of the rent of the said-property be deposited in this Court awaiting the orders of this Court.
It is further ordered that the tenant in the said property, whose name is disclosed to be Mohd. Usman, is restrained from making payment of any amount with respect to the said property to the defendant No.1 or to the defendant No.2 and the parties to communicate this to Mohd. Usman.
It is lastly ordered that the parties are le
