[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Sh Rakesh Kumar Nanda Deceased Through ... vs Sh Jitender Singh on 11 February, 2026
$~66
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 11th February, 2026
+ CM(M) 349/2026
SH RAKESH KUMAR NANDA DECEASED THROUGH HIS WIFE
MS LOVELY NANDA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vishwendra Verma, Ms. Shivali,
Mr. Abhedya S. Verma and Mr.
Abhishek Nagar, Advocates.
versus
SH JITENDER SINGH .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Naman Raj Thakur and Mr. Anuj
Kr. Ranjan, Advocates (through VC).
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
ORDER (Oral)
Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J.
1. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode.
CM APPL. 9634/2026 (for exemption)
2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.
CM(M) 349/2026 & CM APPL. 9635/2026 (for stay)
3. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 227
of the Constitution of India, 1950, assailing the order dated 02nd February,
2026, passed by the learned Trial Court in Ex. P. 45651/2016, whereby the
application filed by the petitioner/LRs of deceased Judgment Debtor ('JD')
has been dismissed.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent has appeared on advance notice and
accepted notice.
5. The matter has been taken up for hearing today with consent of the
learned Counsels.
6. Heard. Record perused.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the decretal amount has
already been paid by the JD to the respondent/decree-holder ('DH') and in
pursuant thereof, a deed of redemption has been duly executed between the
parties. It is contended that the present execution petition is a gross abuse of
the process of law and is liable to be dismissed, as no amount remains due and
payable to the DH.
8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the present
petition has been moved to delay the execution petition and that the impugned
order has been passed by the learned Trial Court after considering the material
on record, and therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed.
9. The relevant portion of the impugned order reads as follows:
"3. As already noted in the series of orders
passed by this court that the suit has already been
decreed in favour of the DH way back in the year
2011. Further, the JD was allowed to contest the suit
vide order dated 08.11.2013 and failing which
ultimately vide order dated 22.05.2015 the decree
dated 30.04.2011 was reaffirmed.
4. Through this application, the LRs of the JD are
pressing this court to go again behind the decree and
enquire as to the genuineness of the redemption deed
by leading evidence which is impermissible. Ld
counsel for LR of the JD has relied on judgment titled
as Rama Avatar Soni vs Mahanta Laxmidhar Das
and Others, (2019) 11 SCC 415. The ratio of this case
is not applicable to the facts of the present case as the
present case is an execution.
6. In view of the aforesaid reasons, the application of
LRs of deceased JD dated 02.02.2026 is hereby
dismissed."
10. The contention of the petitioner that the JD has already paid the
decretal amount to the DH can only be decided in the suit by the Trial Court as
the JD was allowed to contest the suit. However, the JD has failed to do so,
and the decree was passed against him.
11. The Execution Court has rightly observed in the impugned order that
this Court cannot go beyond the decree and inquire as to the genuineness of
the redemption deed as this ground was available to the JD at the time when
he was allowed to contest the suit. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that
there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order as it has been passed in
accordance with law. This petition is dismissed as being devoid of any merits.
Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
12. Copy of this order be given dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J
FEBRUARY 11, 2026/v/ik
