In this Article 227 writ petition, the petitioner challenged a revision order and an execution order rejecting objections under Section 47 CPC. Finding the orders devoid of merit with no material error or irregularity, the Court dismissed the petition.
The writ petition under Article 227 was dismissed as devoid of merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 26
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2256 of 2019
Petitioner :- Smt. Shahnaz Respondent :- Vth Additional District Judge, Aligarh And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Saif Ali Counsel for Respondent :- Suresh Chandra Pandey
Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Saif Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Suresh Chandra Pandey, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.3.
By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks to assail the order dated 06.02.2019 passed by Vth Additional District Judge, Aligarh in S.C.C. Revision No. 2 of 2018, whereby the revision has been rejected. The petitioner also seeks to challenge the order dated 04.11.2017 passed by the Judge Small Causes Court, Aligarh in S.C.C. Execution Misc. No. 76 of 2017, whereby his objections filed under Section 47 CPC has been rejected. The petitioner also seeks to challenge the order dated 09.07.2014 passed by the Small Causes Court in S.C.C. Suit No. 63 of 2013 (K. L. Bhatia vs. Smt. Shahnaz).
The S.C.C. Suit No. 63 of 2013 was decreed by the court below proceeding exparte on 09.07.2014 and thereafter the decree holder filed Execution Case No. 6/2014 in which objections under Section 47 were filed by the petitioner. The executing court has taken note of the objections filed by the petitioner and has recorded that the said objections are on the merits of the case and the same could have been placed when the suit was proceeding. It has also been recorded that despite sufficient notice the petitioner chose not to appear before the court below and in the said circumstances now when the execution case was proceeding, it was not for the executing Court to go beyond the decree. Further it has also been held that the petitioner could not point out as to how the Judge Small Causes Court while deciding the suit had exceeded the jurisdiction or that the decree was not capable of execution.
The counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any material error or irregularity in the order dated 04.11.2017 passed by the executing court and also the order dated 06.02.2019 passed by the revisional court.
In view of the aforesaid, this Court does not find any good ground for interference in the matter. The petition is devoid of merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 9.4.2019 Imroz
[Dr. Y. K. Srivastava, J.]
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere under Article 227 in the revision and execution orders rejecting objections under Section 47 CPC.
Whether the executing court exceeded its jurisdiction or made a material error in rejecting the objections.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Smt. Shahnaz
Vth Additional District Judge, Aligarh
Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
