Appeal against an executing court's order concerning transfer charges on a subject property during execution of an award. The court noted a pending Section 34 petition, observed no interference was warranted, urged the respondent to take steps to effect transfer, and disposed of the appeal.
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.
$~42
Through: Mr Neeleshwar Pavani, Adv.
versus
RAJAT WADHWA .....Respondent Through: Respondent-in-person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL):
CM Appls.54005-06/2024
EFA(OS) (COMM) 16/2024 & CM Appl.54004/2024
Signature Not Verified
EFA(OS) (COMM) 16/2024
1 of 3
Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY Signing Date: 23.0 9.2024 20:34:03
Signature Not Verified
EFA(OS) (COMM) 16/2024
2 of 3
Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY Signing Date: 23.0 9.2024 20:34:03
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
AMIT BANSAL, J
SEPTEMBER 13, 2024 /pmc
Signature Not Verified
EFA(OS) (COMM) 16/2024
3 of 3
Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY Signing Date: 23.0 9.2024 20:34:03
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Division Bench should interfere with the impugned order in an application in a disposed-of execution petition while the Section 34 petition was pending.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Surender Gupta and Anr
Rajat Wadhwa
Rajiv Shakdher
Amit Bansal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
