The High Court of Delhi dismissed an execution petition first for non-prosecution due to the decree holder's delay over five years and then upon sudden withdrawal by new counsel.
The execution petition was dismissed for non-prosecution and subsequently dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
$~9
Versus
FILATEX INDIA ..... Judgement Debtor
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW O R D E R
% 12.01.2017
that the property of the judgment debtor situated at 5509, Basti Harphool Singh, Sadar Thana Road, Delhi, owing to which the New Delhi District Judge had returned the execution to this Court, is in fact not the property of the judgment debtor and the judgment debtor is in fact residing at Gurgaon, Haryana. Mr. Vishnu Sankar, Advocate appearing for the decree holder did not say anything. For this reason, the Registrar (Original) posted the matter before this Court.
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.
JANUARY 12, 2017
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.
JANUARY 12, 2017/ bs
Page 2 of 2
EX.P. 1/2007
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the execution petition should be dismissed for delay and non-prosecution.
Whether the execution petition should be dismissed on withdrawal.
RUBFILA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
FILATEX INDIA
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
