In Civil Revision No. 5053 of 2009, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the petition seeking directions to expedite an execution proceeding. The court held that since the petitioner had not concluded her evidence before the executing court, the delay was attributable to her, negating any ground for interference.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No.5053 of 2009(O&M) Date of decision:11.12.2009.
Amar Kaur .... Petitioner VERSUS
Jagbir Singh and others .... Respondents
CORAM:Hon'ble Mrs.Justice Sabina
Present: Mr.N.L.Sammi, Advocate for the petitioner.
SABINA, J. (ORAL)
This Revision Petition has been filed for issuance of a direction to learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rajpura, to expedite the petition under Order 21 Rule 32 CPC, pending before it.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that no ground for interference is made out.
The petitioner herself has not concluded her evidence before the Executing Court so far. In these circumstances, it is evident that delay is due to the fact that the petitioner herself has not able to conclude her evidence. Hence, no ground for interference is made out at this stage.
Dismissed.
11.12.2009 (SABINA) shamsher Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there is sufficient ground for the High Court to interfere with the delay in the execution proceeding.
Whether the petitioner's failure to conclude evidence justifies dismissal of the revision petition.
Amar Kaur
Jagbir Singh and others
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
