Nitesh Yadav Vs State of Haryana and Others

The petitioner through insta n t petition under Article 227 o f the Constituti o n of India is seeking setting aside of order dated 23.02. 2 026 (Annexure P-1) whereby learned Additi o nal District Judge, Gurugram has stayed the e xecution proceedings.

¶15

Mr. Aayush Gupta, Advocate filed power of attorney on behalf of responden t Nos. 5 and 7 which is taken o n record. Registry is directed t o tag the same a t an appropriate place.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is registered adoption d e ed and Will executed by Mr. D alip Singh in his favour, thus, h e is entitled to the compensation awarded by learned Additional District Judge, Gurugram vide award dated 19.05.2023. The respondents have filed a c ivil AJAY PRASHER suit assaili n g veracity of adoption deed an d Will. Their stay application st a nds 2026.07.02 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

CR No.3448-2026 -2-

¶18

dismissed. Adjudication of civil suit would take quite long time and during said period, compensation received from the Government cannot be kept with Executing Court.

¶19

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that it would not be appropriate to disburse compensation to the petitioner because the respondents are legal heirs of deceased Dalip Singh. They have no objection if the Civil Court is directed to adjudicate their suit in a time bound manner.

¶20

From a perusal of record, it is evident that petitioner is claiming disbursement of compensation on the ground that adoption deed and Will is in his favour. The respondents have filed civil suit No.CS-2585-2025 which is pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurugram. Disbursement of awarded compensation to petitioner before adjudication of suit filed by respondents would not be just and fair. It would be in the interest of both the parties if at least the aforesaid civil suit is adjudicated.

¶21

To resolve the matter, learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurugram is requested to adjudicate the aforesaid civil suit expeditiously and preferably within 02 years from today. The Executing Court would disburse awarded compensation as per rights determined by the Civil Court in the aforesaid suit. Filing of appeal by any party would not inhibit the Executing Court to adjudicate the execution application. In the meantime, the awarded compensation may be kept in the shape of FDR with any bank.

¶22

Disposed of.

¶23

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

¶24

(JAGMOHAN BANSAL) July, 02, 2026 JUDGE Ajay Prasher

¶25

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

¶26

AJAY PRASHER 2026.07.02 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Nitesh Yadav v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitesh Yadav v. State of Haryana and Others

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

Ajmer and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Sumeet Ahluwalia and Another Vs Emaar India Limited

Mohammad Ishak Khan Vs National Highway Authority of India and Others

Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs Malwinder Kaur and Others

Azad Ahmed Vs State of Haryana and Others

Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Govt of Haryana and Others Vs Jamila