Dismissed

Ganeshilal Son of Late Ghasi Lal v. Rajendra Singh Son of Dayasingh Ji Chawla

Rajasthan HC10 Oct 2022CW/10155/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the dismissal of an application to place certified copies of a sale deed and a statement on record during execution proceedings. The High Court upheld the lower court's finding that the documents were already on record and the application was filed to cause delay, dismissing the petition but directing expedited disposal.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; Executing Court directed to expedite hearing and disposal of execution petition.

Ganeshilal Son of Late Ghasi Lal Vs Rajendra… — Execution and Attachment | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10155/2022

¶3

Ganeshilal Son Of Late Ghasi Lal, Resident Of Raipura Chouraha, Kaithoon Road, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota (Raj.)

¶4

----Decree Debtor/Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Rajendra Singh Son Of Dayasingh Ji Chawla, Resident Of Gumanpura Kota

¶7

Decree Holder

¶8

Ghasilal S/o Manna Lal (Deceased), Th. Lr.s-

¶9

2/1. Smt. Kailashi Bai, Wife Of Late Ghasi Lal

¶10

2/2. Bheru Lal, Son Of Late Ghasi Lal

¶11

2/3. Omprakash, Son Of Late Ghasi Lal

¶12

2/4. Surendra Alias Pappu, Son Of Late Ghasi Lal

¶13

2/5. Ishwarlal, Son Of Late Ghasi Lal

¶14

2/6. Kamlabai, Daughter Of Late Ghasi Lal

¶15

2/7. Rampatibai, Daughter Of Late Ghasi Lal

¶16

2/8. Sugnabai, Daughter Of Late Ghasi Lal

¶17

2/9. Rekhabai, Daughter Of Late Ghasi Lal

¶18

2/10 Chamelibai Daughter Of Late Ghasi Lal, No.2/1 To 2/10 . All Resident Of Raipura Chouraha Kaithoon Road Tehsil Ladpura District Kota Raj

¶19

----Performa Decree Debtor/Respondents

¶20

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudarshan Kumar Laddha For Respondent(s) :

¶21

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL

¶22

Order

¶23

10/10/2022

¶24

This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 27.05.2022 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge No.6, Kota in Case No.4/2019

¶25

(2 of 3)

¶26

[CW-10155/2022]

¶27

whereby, an application filed by the petitioner/judgment debtor seeking leave of the Court to place on record certain documents, has been dismissed.

¶28

The relevant facts in brief are that a civil suit filed by the respondent No.1/decree holder for permanent injunction against the petitioner and the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents No.2/1 to 2/10 came to be decreed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.1, (South), Kota vide its judgment dated 16.01.2001. In the execution petition filed therein by the respondent No.1, the petitioner, who has filed objections under Section 47 CPC, moved an application seeking leave of the Court to place on record a copy of the sale deed dated 25.08.1982 as also a copy of the statement of respondent No.1 as PW-1, which has been dismissed by the learned Executing court vide its order dated 27.05.2022, impugned herein.

¶29

Assailing the order, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned Executing Court erred in rejecting his application inasmuch as the documents sought to be placed on record were certified copies and were necessary for just and effective disposal of the objections filed by him under Section 47 CPC. He submits that although, the documents were part of the civil suit; but, they are not available on record. He, therefore, prays that this writ petition be allowed, the order dated 27.05.2022 be quashed and set aside and the application filed by him be allowed.

¶30

Heard. Considered.

¶31

While dismissing the application, the learned Executing Court has recorded a categorical finding that the judgment and decree dated 16.01.2001 have been passed by the learned trial Court

¶32

(3 of 3)

¶33

[CW-10155/2022]

¶34

relying upon the statement of the respondent/plaintiff as PW-1 as also certified copy of the sale deed dated 25.08.1982 which are part of the record. It has been observed that in view thereof, it was apparent that the petitioner/judgment debtor has moved the application not bonafidely; but, to delay the execution proceeding only.

¶35

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and scanning the material available on record, this Court concurs with the findings recorded by the learned Executing Court. The judgment and decree dated 16.01.2001 are based on the statement of respondent-plaintiff as PW-1 as also the certified copy of the sale deed dated 25.08.1982. This Court does not find the order dated 27.05.2022 to be suffering from any perversity or patent jurisdictional error so as to warrant interference of this Court under its limited supervisory jurisdiction vide Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶36

Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merit. However, in view of life of the execution petition, the learned Executing Court is directed to expedite hearing and disposal of the execution petition as early as possible.

¶37

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J

¶38

Manish/127

Ganeshilal Son of Late Ghasi Lal v. Rajendra Singh Son of Dayasingh Ji Chawla

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganeshilal Son of Late Ghasi Lal v. Rajendra Singh Son of Dayasingh Ji Chawla

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

Malkhan S/O Laxman Vs Gram Panchayat Manchi

M/S R.K. Construction Vs State of Rajasthan

M/S Meera Deepak Industries Vs Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.

Jagannath S/O Sohanlal Vs Sohan Singh S/O Shri Bhajan Lal

Ram Sahai Sharma S/O Late Shri Gangaram @ Ganguram Vs Kallu Sharma S/O Shri Shyam Sunder

All Residents of Gram Chittoli Vs State of Rajasthan