Allowed¶10

Kartar Singh Since Deceased through His Lrs Gurmeet Singh v. Mangat Singh Since Deceased through Lrs

Punjab & Haryana HC12 Sept 2025CR/6379/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Kartar Singh v. Mangat Singh; CR-6379-2025 (O&M); Punjab and Haryana High Court; Article 227 Constitution of India; condonation of delay 682 days; appeal against final decree dated 03.02.2023; execution application warrants of possession with police aid; abuse of process; direction for expeditious disposal within one month; Mandeep Pannu J.; decided 12.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the learned Additional District Judge, SAS Nagar, Mohali to decide the petitioner's application for condonation of delay dated 17.12.2024 strictly in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, preferably within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order; civil revision petition allowed and pending applications disposed of. ¶10

Kartar Singh Since Deceased through His… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶10

Issue for consideration

Whether, in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, a direction should issue to the learned Additional District Judge, SAS Nagar, Mohali for expeditious adjudication of the petitioner's application dated 17.12.2024 for condonation of delay in the pending appeal, the respondents having meanwhile actively pursued execution before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kharar while deliberately not filing their reply.

¶6

Court's answer

Despite the application for condonation of delay filed as far back as 17.12.2024, the respondents have not filed their reply till date; the case has been adjourned on multiple occasions for mediation and thereafter for reply, with repeated indulgence and last opportunities granted to the respondents, but without any result.

¶7

Ratio / Principle

The respondents have been vigorously pursuing their execution application before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kharar and securing warrants of possession, while deliberately delaying the disposal of the petitioner's condonation application pending before the appellate Court; such conduct amounts to abuse of process and causes serious prejudice to the petitioner.

¶8

Key takeaways

No further delay can be permitted; accordingly, the learned Additional District Judge, SAS Nagar, Mohali is requested to decide the petitioner's application for condonation of delay dated 17.12.2024 strictly in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, preferably within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.ratio¶9
The civil revision petition is allowed with the above directions, and pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India — petition seeking a direction to the learned Additional District Judge, SAS Nagar, Mohali to expeditiously adjudicate the application dated 17.12.2024 for condonation of 682 days' delay in the appeal against the final decree dated 03.02.2023 — respondents simultaneously pressing execution before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kharar and obtaining warrants of possession with police aid, while failing to file reply despite repeated last opportunities and a failed mediation — held, such conduct amounts to abuse of process and causes serious prejudice; no further delay can be permitted — Additional District Judge requested to decide the condonation application strictly in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, preferably within one month of receipt of a certified copy — civil revision petition allowed; pending applications disposed of.

¶1

CR-6379-2025 (O&M)

¶2

- 1 -

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

-.-

¶5

CR-6379-2025 (O&M) Decided on :- 12.09.2025

¶6

Kartar Singh (s i nce deceased) through his LRs ....Petitioner

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Mangat Singh ( s ince deceased) through his LRs ....Responden t s

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU

¶10

Present: M r . Sartaj Singh Gill, Advocate fo r the petitioner.

¶11

-.-

¶12

MANDEEP PANNU J.

¶13

Pr e sent civil revision petition und e r Article 227 of the Constitutio n of India has been filed by the petitioner-Kartar S ingh (since deceased) through his LRs seeking a direction to the learned Addi t ional District Judge, SAS Na g ar, Mohali to expe d itiously adjudicate upon the ap p lication dated 17.12.2024 filed for condonation o f delay in the appeal titled as “ Kartar Singh (since deceased) through LRs v. Mangat Singh (since deceased) through LRs” , pending before the said Court.

¶14

It i s submitted that the petitioner is a co-owner in the suit prop e rty along with the respondents and other co-sh a rers. On 23.12.2010, respon d ent Mangat Singh fi led a suit for possession of 1/1 6 th share by way of partition o f the house and for p ermanent injunction restrainin g the defendants from making a ny construction o v er the said property. By judg m ent dated 16.11.2016, the lear n ed Additional Civi l Judge decided the said civil su i t. Subsequently, on 04.01.2017, the respondent file d an application before the Co u rt of Civil Judge (Junior Divis i on) for passing of f i nal decree, which came to be p a ssed on 03.02.2023. Thereafter , on 29.08.2023, the respondent filed an execution application before the Civil Ju d ge TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.13 08:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶15

CR-6379-2025 (O&M) - 2 -

¶16

(Junior Divisio n ), Kharar, for executing the jud g ment and decree dated 03.02.2 0 23 whereby the re p ort of the Local Commissioner w as accepted. 3. O n 27.11.2024, the petitioner filed objections in the said execu t ion proceedings, i n ter alia, contending that his s h are had also been confirmed by judgment date d 16.11.2016, being a co-share r in the suit property, and that his share was bein g reduced with mala fide intent i ons. However, on 11.12.2024, the Civil Judge (J u nior Division), Kharar dism i ssed the objections filed by the petitioner and i s sued warrants of possession al o ng with police aid. Since then, the Executing Cour t has been issuing warrants of p o ssession and directing the polic e to provide assista n ce in execution of the warr a nts vide various orders, and the execution appli c ation is now pending for 12.09. 2 025. 4. In the meantime, on 17.12.2024, the petitioner filed a civil ap p eal titled as “ Kartar Singh (since deceased) through LRs v. Mangat Singh (since deceased) through LRs.” before the Court o f the learned Additional Dis t rict Judge, SAS N a gar, against the judgment and decree dated 03.02.2023, wher e by final decree ha d been passed. Along with the sa i d appeal, the petitioner also mo v ed an application f or condonation of delay of 68 2 days as well as an application for stay of operatio n of the judgment and decree d a ted 03.02.2023. On 17.12.2024, the learned Additio n al District Judge, SAS Nagar i ssued notice in the application for condonation o f delay for 23.12.2024. On tha t date, counsel for the respon d ent appeared, and p arties were directed to be pr e sent in person on 24.12.2024 for exploring the p o ssibility of settlement.

¶17

However, the matter was adjourned to 08.01.2025 and then remai n ed pending for aw a iting report of the mediation for three consecutive dates. Whe n no compromise w a s effected, the case was adjour n ed to 28.02.2025 for filing repl y to TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.13 08:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

CR-6379-2025 (O&M) - 3 -

¶19

the application for condonation of delay. On t h at date, no reply was filed by the respondents, a n d the case was adjourned to 1 8 .03.2025 for reply subject to last opportunity. A g ain, reply was not filed and the m atter was adjourned to 15.04.2 0 25 for filing reply s ubject to last opportunity. On 1 5.04.2025, yet again reply was not filed, and the matter was adjourned to 25. 0 5.2025, subject to last and fi nal opportunity. O n 22.05.2025, though no reply was filed, on the request of the parties, the ca s e was referred to the Medi a tion Centre for 27.05.2025. On 14.07.2025, the mediation report was received, recording that the matter could not be settled. Eve n then, no reply was filed, and th e case was adjourned to 22.09.2 0 25 for reply, subje c t to yet another last opportunity .

¶20

It is submitted by the petitioner th a t on the one hand, the respond e nts are actively pu r suing the execution proceedi n gs before the Civil Judge (Ju n ior Division), Kharar and obtaining warrants of po s session with police aid, but on the other hand, the y are deliberately and purposel y not filing reply to the petition e r’s application for condonation of delay in the a ppeal pending before the lear n ed Additional Dist r ict Judge, SAS Nagar. The pe t itioner contends that such con d uct of the responde n ts has stalled the hearing of hi s application since 17.12.2024, and some direction i s required to ensure expeditious disposal of the application.

¶21

Findings

¶22

Ha v ing considered the content of the petition and the chronolog y of events noted a b ove, it is evident that despit e the filing of the application for condonation of delay as far back as on 17.12.2 0 24, the respondents have not f i led their reply till d ate. The record further shows t h at the case has been adjourne d on multiple occasi o ns for mediation and thereafter for reply, with repeated indulgence and “last oppor t unities” granted to the responde n ts, but without any result. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.13 08:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶23

CR-6379-2025 (O&M) - 4 -

¶24

O n the other hand, the responde n ts have been vigorously purs u ing their execution application before the Civil J u dge (Junior Division), Kharar a nd securing warra n ts of possession, while delibe r ately delaying the disposal of the petitioner’s co n donation application pending before the appellate Court. S u ch conduct amoun t s to abuse of process and cause s serious prejudice to the petitio n er.

¶25

Conclusion

¶26

In these circumstances, this Cour t is of the considered view tha t no further delay can be permitted. Accordingly, th e learned Additional District Ju d ge, SAS Nagar, M ohali is requested to decid e the petitioner’s application for condonation o f delay dated 17.12.2024 strict l y in accordance with law an d as expeditiously a s possible, preferably within a p e riod of one month from the dat e of receipt of a cert i fied copy of this order.

¶27

Th e civil revision petition is allow e d of with the above directions. 11. Pe n ding application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶28

September 12, 2 025 (MANDEEP PANNU) tripti JUDGE

¶29

Whether s peaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶30

TRIPTI SAINI 2025.09.13 08:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
On 23.12.2010 respondent Mangat Singh filed a suit for possession of 1/16th share by way of partition of the house and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from making any construction over the said property.¶2
Prior proceeding
By judgment dated 16.11.2016, the learned Additional Civil Judge decided the said civil suit.¶2
Prior proceeding
On 04.01.2017 the respondent applied before the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) for passing of final decree; the final decree was passed on 03.02.2023.¶2
Prior proceeding
On 29.08.2023 the respondent filed an execution application before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kharar for executing the judgment and decree dated 03.02.2023 whereby the report of the Local Commissioner was accepted.¶2
Prior proceeding
On 27.11.2024 the petitioner filed objections in the execution proceedings, contending inter alia that his share had also been confirmed by judgment dated 16.11.2016, being a co-sharer in the suit property, and that his share was being reduced with mala fide intentions.¶3
Prior proceeding
On 11.12.2024 the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kharar dismissed the petitioner's objections and issued warrants of possession along with police aid; the Executing Court has since been issuing warrants of possession with police assistance vide various orders, and the execution application is pending for 12.09.2025.¶3
Prior proceeding
In the meantime, on 17.12.2024 the petitioner filed a civil appeal before the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, SAS Nagar against the judgment and decree dated 03.02.2023, whereby final decree had been passed.¶4
Prior proceeding
Along with the appeal, the petitioner also moved an application for condonation of delay of 682 days as well as an application for stay of operation of the judgment and decree dated 03.02.2023.¶4
Prior proceeding
On 17.12.2024 the learned Additional District Judge, SAS Nagar issued notice in the application for condonation of delay for 23.12.2024; on that date counsel for the respondent appeared and the parties were directed to be present in person on 24.12.2024 for exploring the possibility of settlement.¶4
Prior proceeding
The matter was adjourned to 08.01.2025 and then remained pending for awaiting the report of mediation for three consecutive dates; when no compromise was effected, the case was adjourned to 28.02.2025 for filing reply to the condonation application.¶5
Prior proceeding
No reply was ever filed despite adjournments to 18.03.2025, 15.04.2025 and 25.05.2025 on successive last opportunities; on 22.05.2025 the case was referred to the Mediation Centre for 27.05.2025; the mediation report received on 14.07.2025 recorded that the matter could not be settled; even then no reply was filed and the case was adjourned to 22.09.2025 subject to yet another last opportunity.¶5

Kartar Singh Since Deceased through His Lrs Gurmeet Singh v. Mangat Singh Since Deceased through Lrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kartar Singh Since Deceased through His Lrs Gurmeet Singh v. Mangat Singh Since Deceased through Lrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raghbir Singh Vs Subha Chand

National Insurance Company Limited Vs Dinesh and Others

Devender Vs Naveen & Ors.

Charanjit Vs Pb.Wakf Board

United India Ins.Co. Vs Sita Wanti & Ors.

Kehar Singh Vs State of Haryana and Others