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

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Amarinder Singh Grewal, J
Randhir Singh – Appellant
Versus
Mini Bansal and others – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Mayur Karkra
For the Respondents: Mr. Manmeet Singh Bindra, Ms. Nandini Gupta

AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying for setting aside of the impugned order dated 09.07.2025 (Annexure P-6) passed in EXE-618-2024 titled as Mini Bansal and another Vs. Randhir Singh and others whereby the objections filed by the petitioner-judgment debtor to the execution proceedings have been dismissed and the impugned order dated 29.07.2025 (Annexure P-7) whereby the learned Executing Court has directed the concerned bailiff to execute warrants of possession by breaking the locks/door during day time and after giving reasonable warning in the presence of respectables of the locality.

2. In brief, the facts are that father of the petitioner herein and pro forma respondent namely Pritam Singh had taken the shop on rent from Chhota Singh @ Rs.500/- per month, who later sold the shop to Radha Bansal and respondent No.1 vide sale deed dated 12.12.2001. Being the co-landlord, respondent No.1 demanded rent from Pritam Singh but he said that he has already deposited the rent upto the month of April, 2003 in the name of Chhota Singh in the Civil Court but did not pay any rent to respondent

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