The High Court dismissed an execution petition, holding that a ten-year delay without effective execution steps makes an adjournment sine die contrary to the Limitation Act, 1963.
Execution petition dismissed.
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.
$~15
Through: Mr. G.S. Narula & Mr. M. Sarwar, Advs.
Versus
SHREE TRILOKNATH GAMBHRI ..... Judgement Debtor Through: Mr. Amit Mahajan, Adv.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
O R D E R
EX.P. 30/2006
Page 1 of 2
No costs.
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J
NOVEMBER 07, 2016 ‘gsr’..
EX.P. 30/2006
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an execution petition pending for ten years without effective steps by the decree-holder can be adjourned sine die.
Whether filing an execution petition without taking effective steps can extend the period of limitation under the Limitation Act, 1963.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
E.D.C. LTD.
SHREE TRILOKNATH GAMBHRI
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
