Dismissed

Sadrunisha v. O P Aggarwal & Ors.

Delhi HC27 Jul 2018EX.F.A./33/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appellant filed an execution first appeal challenging the dismissal of objections to execution based on a new chain of documents. The court held that since these documents were never before the executing court and no application for additional evidence was made, the appeal cannot be entertained. It was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed with liberty to the appellant to file an application before the ADJ or prefer a properly constituted appeal based on the documents filed for the first time.

Sadrunisha Vs O P Aggarwal & Ors. — Execution and Attachment | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~23

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- EX.F.A. 33/2018 SADRUNISHA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. B.K. Mishra, Adv. Versus

¶4

O P AGGARWAL & ORS ..... Respondents Through: None.

¶5

CORAM:

¶6

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW

¶7

O R D E R

¶8

% 27.07.2018

¶9

CM No.29640/2018 (for exemption)

¶10

Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

¶11

The application is disposed of. EX.F.A. 33/2018, CM No.29639/2018 (for condonation of 13 days delay in preferring the appeal) & CM No.29641/2018 (for stay)

¶12

This Execution First Appeal has been preferred against the order [dated 3^rd April, 2018 in Execution No.23345/2016 of the Court of Additional District Judge (ADJ)-01, District Central] of dismissal in limine of the objections under Section 47 read with Order XXI Rules 26 and 99 of the Code of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) to the execution preferred by the appellant.

¶13

The appellant preferred the objections, claiming to have purchased the property on 8^th September, 2015 from Nizamuddin by way of unregistered Agreement to Sell, General Power of Attorney (GPA), Receipt, Possession Letter, Affidavit etc. and claiming title to the property independent from the judgment-debtor.

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

EX.F.A. 33/2018

¶16

The objections were dismissed, recording that (i) the unregistered Agreement to Sell, GPA, Will, Affidavit etc. dated 8^th September, 2015 were of after 13^th December, 2003 when the suit, of decree wherein execution was sought, was decided and also of after 15^th March, 2012 i.e. the date when the appeal against the judgment and decree in the suit was allowed and the suit decreed in favour of the plaintiff; (ii) the documents filed by the appellant did not disclose as to from where Nizamuddin, who had executed the documents aforesaid in favour of the appellant, derived his title; no chain of documents/title deeds from the registered owner to Nizamuddin or from the recorded owner to Nizamuddin was produced; (iii) one of the documents produced by the appellant herself showed occupation of the subject property by the judgment-debtor; and, (iv) the objections preferred by the appellant had no merit since the chain of documents were not produced.

¶17

The appellant, along with this appeal has as annexures A3 to A9 filed the chain of documents. 7. There is nothing to indicate that the said annexures were produced before the Executing Court. No application for filing documents which were not before the First Court, has been filed. 8. The counsel for the appellant also admits that the said documents were not before the Executing Court when the objections were dismissed. As usual, blame is placed on the earlier advocate for the appellant but without realising that similar blame can be put on the counsel now appearing who has not only not made out any case for filing of additional documents in appeal but has also not filed along with this memorandum of appeal, the judgment and decree which is under execution.

¶18

EX.F.A. 33/2018

¶19

Page 2 of 3

¶20

The counsel for the appellant however states that the appellant has sought review of order dated 15^th March, 2012 of this Court of dismissal of RFA No.127/2004 in which the decree under execution was passed. On enquiry, it is informed that the appellant was not a party to the RFA No.127/2004. It is stated that this petition be adjourned awaiting the disposal of the review.

¶21

I am unable to see the correlation between the two.

¶22

Without the documents filed along with this appeal being before the First Court and / or furnishing justification for non-filing thereof before the First Court and filing for the first time before this Court, the appeal cannot be entertained.

¶23

The appeal is dismissed with liberty to the appellant to take appropriate remedies on the basis of the documents filed for the first time before this Court, including of either applying before the ADJ or of preferring a properly constituted appeal.

¶24

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J

¶25

JULY 27, 2018 ‘gsr’..

¶26

Page 3 of 3

¶27

EX.F.A. 33/2018

Sadrunisha v. O P Aggarwal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadrunisha v. O P Aggarwal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Bhatnagar Vs Union of India & Anr.

Shamim Bano Vs Jalaluddin

Pardeep Kumar Jindal and Anr. Vs UOI and Anr.

Sangeeta Agarwal Vs Jawahar Lal Nehru Sports Trust

Tina Gupta Vs M L Sharma & Anr.

Budh Singh Vs Estate Officer and Assistant Director