Sudesh Bala Vs Mithilesh Kumar Jha and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Sudesh Bala Vs Mithilesh Kumar Jha and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Revision petition disposed of with directions that the Executing Court decide the objections after remand independently, after hearing both parties, afresh and as expeditiously as possible; both parties may raise all pleas available in accordance with law; counsel for the objector and decree holder to fully assist the Executing Court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Executing Court should decide the objections filed by the petitioner after remand independently of the observations made by the Appellate Court while remanding, and as expeditiously as possible.

Ratio / Principle

The Executing Court shall decide the objections after remand independently and after hearing both the parties concerned; it shall be open to both parties to raise all pleas available to them in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

The Executing Court shall decide the objections filed by the petitioner afresh after remand as expeditiously as possible.ratio¶21
As undertaken before the Court, learned counsel for the objector as well as the decree holder and all persons concerned shall fully assist the Executing Court in expeditiously deciding the objections.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India (CR-3232-2025) by Sudesh Bala against the judgment dated 05.04.2025 of the Additional District Judge, Gurugram, which allowed respondent No.1's appeal against the order dated 07.01.2025 of the Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Rent Controller and remanded the matter. Counsel for the petitioner sought that the objections pending before the Executing Court be decided independent of the Appellate Court's remand observations, which were contended to be prejudicial, and as expeditiously as possible. The Court, taking note of the fair stand of both sides, disposed of the revision petition with directions: (i) the Executing Court shall decide the objections after remand independently and after hearing both parties, who remain free to raise all pleas available in law; (ii) the objections shall be decided afresh as expeditiously as possible; and (iii) counsel for the objector and the decree holder shall fully assist the Executing Court in expeditious disposal, as undertaken before the Court.

CR-3232-2025 [1]

126

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CR-3232-2025 Date of decision: 07.07.2025

Sudesh Bala

...Petitioner

Versus

Mithilesh Kumar Jha and another ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL

Present: Mr. Harish Chhabra, Advocate and Ms. Pooja Chhabra, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Shreyansi Verma, Advocate for respondent No.1. ****

VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)

This is a revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the impugned judgment dated 05.04.2025 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Additional District Judge, Gurugram, whereby appeal filed by respondent No.1 against the order dated 07.01.2025 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Rent Controller has been allowed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that while remanding the case, the Appellate Court has made observations which are prejudicial to the petitioner. It is submitted that once the matter has been remanded, the Executing Court be directed to decide the objections filed by the petitioner independent of the observations made by the Appellate Court, as expeditiously as possible. It is further submitted that the counsel for the petitioner before the Executing Court would fully assist the Court in

PAWAN KUMAR 2025.07.08 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CR-3232-2025 [2]

expeditious disposal of the said objections.

Learned counsel for respondent No.1 has also submitted that even counsel for the decree holder would fully assist the Court in expeditious disposal of the objections. It is submitted that liberty be granted to respondents to raise all the arguments as are available to them before the Executing Court for the purpose of deciding the objections filed by the petitioner.

Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances and the fair stand taken on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent No.1, the present revision petition is disposed of with the following observations/directions:-

i) The Executing Court would decide the objections after remand independently and after hearing both the parties concerned. It would be open to both the parties to raise all the pleas which are available to them in accordance with law.

ii) The Executing Court would decide the objections filed by the petitioner afresh after remand as expeditiously as possible.

iii) As undertaken before this Court, learned counsel for the objector as well as decree holder and all the persons concerned would fully assist the Executing Court in expeditiously deciding the objections.

07.07.2025

Pawan

(VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned:Yes/No Whether reportable:Yes/No

PAWAN KUMAR 2025.07.08 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document