Dismissed

Sunil Kumar Garga v. M/S Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd.

Delhi HC9 May 2019CM(M)/663/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-paragraph order notes a challenge to an execution listing where the judgment debtor filed Section 34 objections without a stay. The court found no need to issue notice, ordered the matter preponed before the executing court, and disposed of the petition along with pending applications.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of; order issued to preposite execution matter before trial court; copy sent to trial court.

Sunil Kumar Garga Vs M/S Ansal Properties… — Execution and Attachment | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~6

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CM(M) 663/2019

¶4

SUNIL KUMAR GARGA

¶5

..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Manish Vashisht, Mr.Manashwy Jha and Ms.Urvi Kapoor, Advocates

¶6

versus

¶7

M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

¶8

..... Respondent

¶9

Through:

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

% 09.05.2019 CM APPL No.19928/2019

¶13

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶14

The application stands disposed of.

¶15

CM(M) 663/2019

¶16

This petition challenges the order dated 12.04.2019 whereby the matter is posted for arguments on 17.07.2019. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner the execution petition was filed on 31.01.2018 to execute an award dated 07.09.2017. On 20.04.2018 an order was passed by the learned executing court whereby a notice was issued to the Directors of the Judgment Debtor company with a direction to file the affidavit of assets per Form 16A Appendix E of CPC. The said order was repeated on 14.09.2018. However on 11.01.2019 the Directors appeared and the matter was simply adjourned to 12.04.2019 on the plea the judgment debtor has filed

¶17

objections under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act. It is alleged no stay was granted in a petition under Section 34 (supra). However, instead of proceeding in the execution, the execution has now been listed for arguments on 17.07.2019. It is alleged the impugned order per se is illegal as there has been no stay against the execution, hence the court ought to have proceeded with the execution.

¶18

There is no need to issue notice of the petition to the respondents herein. The matter before the executing court is preponed on 14.05.2019 instead of 17.07.2019 and the objection, if any, be disposed of. The learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to intimate the counsel for the judgment debtors of the next date of hearing before the trial court. Copy of the order be sent to the learned trial court for compliance.

¶19

In the circumstances, the petition stands disposed of. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.

¶20

Copy of the order be given dasti under signature of the Court Master.

¶21

YOGESH KHANNA, J.

¶22

MAY 09, 2019 VLD

Sunil Kumar Garga v. M/S Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar Garga v. M/S Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Kumar Vs Tara Chand

Vantage Construction Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs Col S J Chaudhri (Deceased) Thr Lrs

Vishnu Kumar Vs Jamil Ahmed

Kapil Kumar Vs M/S M & a Designs

Geeta @ Nilofer Vs Ram Bedi & Ors.

C R Aggarwal Vs the State (Govt of NCT ,Delhi) & Ors.

Ashok Kumar Vs Haryana State Korfball Association & Ors.

Anuj Leekha Vs Krishan Leekha (Deceased) Thr Lrs

Rajesh Kumar Vs Tara Chand

Vishnu Kumar Vs Jamil Ahmed

Kapil Kumar Vs M/S M & a Designs

Bilkish Begum & Ors. Vs Abdul Rehman & Ors.

Ram Kishan & Anr. Vs Manish Kuamr & Anr.

Dhruv Dhindsa Vs Accomplish Infra Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.