Petition challenging dismissal of an application under Order XXI Rule 29 CPC for stay of execution proceedings was disposed of as infructuous, since the petitioner was already protected by an interim order in a pending regular second appeal restraining coercive action.
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.
$~61
Through: Mr. Abhinav Sharma and Mr. Ujjwal Jain, Advs.
versus
SHEETAL SABHARWAL & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Joydeep Sarma and Mr. Sujal Bhatt, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL
O R D E R
% 10.07.2026
“5. The respondents may proceed with the execution proceedings,
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/07/2026 at 11:10:32
however, the learned Executing Court shall not pass any coercive order against the appellants.”
AJAY DIGPAUL, J
JULY 10, 2026/ AS/yr
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/07/2026 at 11:10:32
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Satish Chander Sabharwal
Sheetal Sabharwal
Others
Ajay Digpaul
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 227 of the Constitution invoking the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate civil courts.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
