M/S Al-Mustaneer Establishment for Trade v. Syndicate Bank
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court ordered the transfer of an execution petition for recovery of a money decree from the Delhi High Court to the District Judge, New Delhi, due to enhanced pecuniary jurisdiction, noting the transferee court also had territorial jurisdiction.
What did the court decide?
The paper book of the execution petition transferred to the court of District Judge, New Delhi, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi.
What the court decided
$~20.
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- EX.P. No.141/2016, Caveat No.902/2016 and EA No.691/2016 (under Order XXI Rule 41 of the CPC).
- M/S AL-MUSTANEER ESTABLISHMENT FOR TRADE ..... Decree Holder Through: Mr. Sonal Sinha, Adv. versus
SYNDICATE BANK ..... Judgement Debtor Through: Ms. Kunal Anand, Adv.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
O R D E R
% 19.10.2016
- Execution is sought of a money decree for recovery of Rs.24,45,045.89p with interest.
- It is stated in the execution petition itself that the judgment debtor Bank has preferred an SLP(C) No.24977/2012 to the Supreme Court.
- The counsel for the decree holder has handed over in the court a copy of the orders of the Supreme Court in the said proceedings to demonstrate that there is no stay of execution.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the execution of a money decree pending in the High Court should be transferred to the subordinate court due to enhanced pecuniary jurisdiction.
Whether a caveat by the judgment debtor prevents the court from ordering transfer if not substantiated by a clear stay order.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
M/S AL-MUSTANEER ESTABLISHMENT FOR TRADE
- respondent
SYNDICATE BANK
Coram
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court