Delhi High Court
Mukesh Chauhan (Deceased) Thr Lrs vs Mange Ram Sharma & Ors on 7 May, 2025
$~21
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 07th May, 2025
+ CM(M) 1342/2019 & CM APPL. 40471/2019
MUKESH CHAUHAN (DECEASED) THR LRS .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Madan Lal Sharma with
Ms.Tejaswini Verma and Mr. Vikrant
Malwal, Advocates.
versus
MANGE RAM SHARMA & ORS .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Pushti Gupta and Mr. Joney,
Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. One Sh. Mukesh Kumar Chauhan (since deceased) had filed a suit
which was registered as Suit No.182/1998. The abovesaid suit was decreed
on 03.04.2001 and based on such judgment and decree, an Execution Petition
was filed.
2. Respondents herein had filed objections.
3. Their such objection petition was dismissed by the concerned
Executing Court.
4. The First Appeal, filed by the Objectors, was also dismissed and,
thereafter, the Objectors were compelled to file Execution Second Appeal
before this Court which was registered as Ex.SA No.2/2012. Such appeal
was taken up by this Court on 23.03.2012 and after hearing both the sides, the
appeal was disposed of with the following directions:-
"6. Appeal is disposed of by setting aside the impugned orders
dated 18.3.2011 and 1.2.2012 so that parties can lead evidence with
respect to their respective stands qua the Will dated 17.1.1989. Nothing
contained in today's order is a reflection on merits of the case of either
of the parties, and the executing Court will decide the objections in
accordance with law after evidence is led by both the parties.
7. Parties to appear before the concerned executing Court alongwith
copy of the today's order on 30th April, 2012. Appeal is disposed of in
terms of aforesaid observations."
5. Resultantly, the parties were again sent back to the learned Executing
Court for leading their respective evidence.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner/Decree Holder submits that the
Decree Holder had concluded its evidence and, for the reasons best known to
the Objectors, did not lead any evidence.
7. Fact, however, remains that the concerned Executing Court vide order
dated 08.03.2019 sought its recusal and, resultantly, the petition was placed
before the Court of learned District & Sessions Judge, North East District,
Karkardooma Courts and vide order dated 11.03.2019, the abovesaid petition
was transferred to some other Court.
8. Eventually, when the transferee Court took up the matter on
27.07.2019, while observing that it had jurisdiction over North East District
only and had no jurisdiction over Shahdara District, directed the transfer of
the Execution Petition to the competent Court for execution while also
directing issuance of Transfer Certificate and Non-Satisfaction Certificate.
9. Such order is under challenge.
10. The aspect of execution or, for that matter, Transfer Certificate would
come into play only once the objections are decided. In case, the objections
were to be dismissed, and for the purposes of carrying out execution, if the
property of the Judgment Debtor is found to be situated in some other District,
the Decree Holder can always make appropriate request in this regard,
seeking transfer of the Execution Petition but, evidently, such stage has not
come as yet. In terms of the specific order passed by this Court on 23.03.2012,
learned Executing Court was directed to give opportunity of leading evidence
to the parties and then to decide the objections in accordance with law. In
such a situation, the concerned Executing Court was not justified in issuing
any Transfer Certificate.
11. Learned counsel for the Objectors leaves it to this Court to pass
appropriate orders in this regard.
12. Manifestly, there is illegality and perversity in impugned order dated
27.07.2019.
13. In view of the abovesaid specific order passed by this Court on
23.03.2012 and in view of the specific directions given by the concerned
Court of learned District & Sessions Judge, North East, learned Executing
Court should have gone ahead with the Objection Petition, instead of
transferring the Execution Petition.
14. While setting aside the above order dated 27.07.2019 and while
allowing the present petition, the parties are directed to appear before the
Court of learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, North East,
Karkardooma Courts who shall then assign the "Execution Petition and the
Objection Petition" to the concerned Court/Successor Court, for further
consideration in accordance with law. Since considerable period has already
elapsed, learned Executing Court would make best efforts to dispose of the
Execution Petition, as expeditiously as possible.
15. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
16. The parties shall appear before the Court of learned Principal District &
Sessions Judge, North East, Karkardooma Courts on 16.05.2025 at 2:00 pm.
17. It is, however, clarified that this Court has not given any opinion with
respect to the merits of the Objection Petition and it will be entirely upto the
learned Executing Court to consider the Objection Petition and to dispose that
of in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity of hearing to both the
sides.
18. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(MANOJ JAIN)
JUDGE
MAY 7, 2025/st/SS
