##PAGE1##

CR-6142-2025 (O&M)(cid:1) Page 1 of 5 (cid:1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

127 CR-6142-2025(O&M)

Date of decision: 24.03.2026 Zayada

...Petitioner(s)

Vs.

Mehar Chand ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

Present:- Mr. Aditya Jain, Advocate Mr. Kaanan Jain, Advocate

Ms. Indu Bala, Advocate Mr. Gurjot Singh, Advocate

for the petitioner.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Present Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of

India read with Section 151 CPC has been filed by the judgment debtor seeking setting aside of the order dated 31.05.2025 (Annexure P1) passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Faridabad whereby application filed by the petitioner

for setting aside ex parte order dated 03.04.2017, has been dismissed. 2. Brief facts of the case in chronological order are as under:-

12.01.2012: Plaintiff/respondent had filed Civil Suit No.246 of 2012 dated 12.01.2012 titled as “Mehar Chand Saini Vs. Zayada” for specific performance

of the Contract dated 12.01.2012.

SUNENA

2026.03.25 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

(cid:1)

CR-6142-2025 (O&M)(cid:1) Page 2 of 5 (cid:1)

18.04.2012: The petitioner had filed written statement dated 18.04.2012 to

the aforesaid Civil Suit.

14.12.2016: Vide judgment and decree dated 14.12.2016, suit of the plaintiff

was decreed.

28.02.2017: In the meantime, the respondent/plaintiff had filed Execution

Petition No.EXE-127 dated 28.02.2017 (Annexure P2).

03.04.2017: In the said Execution Proceedings, the petitioner was proceeded

against ex parte vide order dated 03.04.2017.

04.04.2018: Petitioner had filed Civil Appeal No.211 dated 04.04.2018 against

the said judgment and decree dated 14.12.2016.

17.03.2025: Vide judgment and decree dated 17.03.2025, Civil Appeal filed by

the petitioner was dismissed.

22.05.2025: It is thereafter that the petitioner filed the instant application dated 22.05.2025 (Annexure P4) for setting aside the ex parte order dated

03.04.2017.

22.5.2025: Alongwith the above application, petitioner also filed Application

(Annexure P5) for condonation of delay.

Nil: The respondent/plaintiff had filed replies dated ‘Nil’ (Annexure P6 and P7 respectively) to the applications filed by the petitioner for setting aside the ex

parte order, and for condonation of Delay.

SUNENA

2026.03.25 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

(cid:1)

CR-6142-2025 (O&M)(cid:1) Page 3 of 5 (cid:1)

31.05.2025: Vide impugned order dated 31.05.2025 (Annexure P1), application of the petitioner for setting aside ex parte order dated 03.04.2017,

has been dismissed.

3. It is inter alia submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned Court has passed the impugned order (Annexure P1) in completely illegal and arbitrary manner without appreciation of factual circumstances and ground reality. It is submitted that the impugned order is a non-speaking order especially with regard to the issue of condonation of delay. Learned Court below has failed to appreciate that RSA in the main matter is already pending adjudication before this Court. Thus, application of the petitioner ought to have been allowed and she should have been permitted to contest the Execution Petition. The learned Court below has passed the impugned order in complete haste while losing sight of the process to be adopted while deciding both the applications for condonation of delay as well as setting aside of the ex parte proceedings. Learned Executing Court has adopted a completely biased approached and has acted in haste. It is accordingly prayed

that the impugned order be set aside.

4. No other argument is made on behalf of the petitioner. I have heard learned counsel and perused the case file in great detail. I find no merit

in the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner.

5. The factual matrix of the case has already been noted hereinabove. A perusal of the record of the case shows that notice of the

SUNENA

2026.03.25 19:19 I attest to the accuracy and