Disposed¶6

Smt. Vimla Chopra (Nee Kwatra) v. Lall G. Kwatra and Ors.

Delhi HC15 Jul 2025CM(M)/910/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Abeyance of order dated 09.04.2025 for auction of property; inter se bidding between parties; execution petition and due service upon all parties; amicable settlement; reference to mediation; liberty to revive auction order; Delhi High Court; CM(M) 910/2025 & CM APPL. 29572/2025; Vimla Chopra v. Lall G. Kwatra; Manoj Jain, J.; decided 15 July 2025.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 09.04.2025 kept in abeyance; Executing Court, after due service of the execution petition on all parties, to examine feasibility of inter se bidding for the property; liberty to the Trial Court to revive the said order for auction if inter se bidding is found not possible; reference to mediation permitted. ¶6

Smt. Vimla Chopra (Nee Kwatra) Vs Lall G. Kwatra and Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶6

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 09.04.2025 should be kept in abeyance while the possibility of inter se bidding in respect of the property and an amicable settlement between the parties is explored.

¶1

Court's answer

Petition disposed of with the direction that the impugned order dated 09.04.2025 shall remain in abeyance and the Executing Court shall ascertain, after ensuring due service of the execution petition upon all parties concerned, whether inter se bidding with respect to the property can take place.

¶3

Ratio / Principle

If the Executing Court, after hearing all such parties, is of the view that inter se bidding is not possible, it is open to the Trial Court to revive its order dated 09.04.2025 for putting the property in question to auction.

¶4

Key takeaways

The Trial Court is permitted to refer the matter for mediation if the need arises.ratio¶5
The pending application (CM APPL. 29572/2025) also stands disposed of in the same terms.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Manoj Jain, J.), CM(M) 910/2025, Smt. Vimla Chopra (nee Kwatra) v. Lall G. Kwatra & Ors., decided 15.07.2025: On the joint submission of counsel, petition disposed of; the Trial Court's order dated 09.04.2025 kept in abeyance; the Executing Court, after ensuring due service of the execution petition upon all parties concerned, to consider whether inter se bidding with respect to the property in question can take place; if the Executing Court finds inter se bidding not possible, the Trial Court may revive the order dated 09.04.2025 for putting the property to auction; reference to mediation also permitted; pending application disposed of in the same terms.

¶1

$~47

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 15^th July, 2025

¶3

- CM(M) 910/2025 & CM APPL. 29572/2025 SMT. VIMLA CHOPRA (NEE KWATRA)

¶4

.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rishi Manchanda and Mr. Sidhharth Mullick, Ms.Shalini Bhardwaj, Mr. Aditya Sharma andMr. Vedic Thukral, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

LALL G. KWATRA AND ORS.

¶7

.....Respondent Through: Mr. P K Rawal and Mr. Tarun Agarwal, Advocates. Mr. Vivek Sharma, Ms. Mamta Gautam and Mr. Aditya Jain, Advocates for Respondent no. 8

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶9

Mr. Kirti Uppal, learned Senior Counsel for petitioner and Mr. P K Rawal, learned counsel for respondents (except respondent Nos. 2, 8 and 9) submit that they would have no objection if the impugned order dated 09.04.2025, is put in abeyance and, in the interregnum, the learned Trial Court is directed to explore the possibility of inter se bidding with respect to the property in question.

¶10

It is also apprised that there are strong chances of there being amicable settlement between the parties though fact, however, remains that some of the

¶11

Signature Not Verified

¶12

CM(M) 910/2025

¶13

¶14

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 7.07.2025 18:36:12

¶15

respondents in the present petition are yet to be served.

¶16

In view of the above, the present petition is, hereby, disposed of with the direction that the impugned order dated 09.04.2025 shall remain in abeyance and the learned Executing Court would find out, after ensuring due service of execution petition upon all the parties concerned, whether inter se bidding with respect to the property in question can take place or not.

¶17

In case, the learned Executing Court, after hearing all such parties, is of the view that it is not possible to go for inter se bidding, it would be open for the learned Trial Court to revive the abovesaid order dated 09.04.2025 for the purposes of putting the property in question to auction.

¶18