Dismissed

Daljit Singh v. National Insurance Company Ltd. Thr'H Its Sd, Pat

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Jan 2013CR/357/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In revision, the appellant challenged the attachment and auction sale of a property in execution proceedings. The High Court held that the appellant failed to plead possession of the property, thereby losing the protection of Section 60(1)(ccc) of CPC. The revision was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The execution Court's order rejecting objections and proceeding with auction sale was upheld; revision dismissed.

Daljit Singh Vs National Insurance Company… — Execution and Attachment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

C.R. No.357 of 2013 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

C.R. No.357 of 2013 (O&M)

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: January 21, 2013

¶6

DALJIT SINGH ...PETITIONER

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., PATIALA ...RESPONDENT

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JEYAPAUL.

¶10

Whether the judgement should be reported in the digest? Yes PRESENT: MR. HARDEEP SINGH, ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER. M.JEYAPAUL, J.

¶11

The National Insurance Company, which has got a right of recovery from the owner of the vehicle in the motor accident claim proceedings initiated as against the claimants has laid the execution petition invoking Order 21 Rule 66 CPC.

¶12

The revision petitioner Daljit Singh contended in his objections that the property which belonged to the judgement-debtor had been wrongly attached and therefore, the same could not be sold in the execution proceedings. He has also contended that the house as mentioned in the list of properties was not owned and possessed by the judgement-debtor and as such, the same could not be attached.

¶13

The Execution Court having rejected the objections proceeded further in the Court auction sale of the subject property.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing for the revision

¶15

petitioner/judgement-debtor would contend that Section 60(ccc) of CPC, as

¶16

C.R. No.357 of 2013 (O&M)

¶17

-2-

¶18

amended by the State of Punjab disables the decree holder to attach and sell a residential house in the occupation of the judgement-debtor in execution of a decree.

¶19

I find that there is no merit in the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner. The judgement-debtor/revision petitioner has not categorically stated in the objections that he has been in possession and enjoyment of the subject house which was brought for Court auction on attachment of the same. Every house which is owned by the judgement-debtor cannot be exempted under Section 60(1)(ccc) of CPC as amended by the State of Punjab. As per Section 60(1)(c) of CPC, the houses and other buildings belonging to an agriculturist or a labourer or a domestic servant and occupied by him are exempted from attachment and sale in execution of decree. As per the amendment introduced by the State of Punjab in Section 60(1)(c), one main residential house and other buildings attached to it belonging to a judgement-debtor other than an agriculturist and occupied by him shall be exempted from attachment and sale in execution of decree. In other words, all the houses and other buildings belonging to an agriculturist or a labourer or a domestic servant and occupied by him are exempted from attachment and sale in execution of the decree, but only one main residential house and the buildings attached to it belonging to a judgment-debtor other than an agriculturist and occupied by him shall be exempted from attachment and sale in execution of decree. As already pointed out by me, nothing has been pleaded as to the status of the judgement-debtor whether he was an agriculturist or a non-agriculturist.

¶20

C.R. No.357 of 2013 (O&M)

¶21

-3-

¶22

The judgement-debtor has not taken any plea in the objections that he has been in occupation of the present house which is brought for Court auction sale on attachment. Rather, he has emphatically pleaded that he has not been in possession of the same.

¶23

In view of the above, I find that the benefit of Section 60(1)(c) or Section 60(1)(ccc) of CPC would not come to the rescue of the judgement debtor in the present case. In my considered view, the Execution Court has rightly rejected the objections raised by judgement-debtor Daljit Singh. Therefore, the revision fails and it stands dismissed.

¶24

January 21, 2013 Gulati

¶25

( M.JEYAPAUL ) JUDGE

Daljit Singh v. National Insurance Company Ltd. Thr'H Its Sd, Pat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Daljit Singh v. National Insurance Company Ltd. Thr'H Its Sd, Pat

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

Pawan Kumar Vs Salinder @ Surinder Kumar

Bhagwana and Others Vs Jai Bhagwan and Others

Harvinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Balwinder Kaur and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

M/S Simar Plasticizer and Anr. Vs Punjab Alkalies and Chemicals Ltd.