Thursday, 23, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Pooran Singh vs Scindia Devsthan Trust Thr.
2022 Latest Caselaw 2826 MP

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 2826 MP
Judgement Date : 28 February, 2022

Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pooran Singh vs Scindia Devsthan Trust Thr. on 28 February, 2022
Author: Sunita Yadav
                               1
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
                                BEFORE
                   HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV
                      ON THE 28th OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                   MISC. PETITION No. 3357 of 2021

       Between:-
       POORAN SINGH S/O SHRI MANGALIYA , AGED
       ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PVT. JOB
       CHHATRI DAULATRAO MAHARAJ CAMPUS
       CHHATRI BAZAR LASHKAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                          .....PETITIONER
       (BY SHRI H.K. SHUKLA, ADVOCATE)

       AND

1.     SCINDIA DEVSTHAN TRUST THR. SECRETARY
       RANA KARAN SINGH S/O LATE SHRI RANA
       SURENDRA SINGH JAIVILAS PARISAR (MADHYA
       PRADESH)

2.     SMT    JYOTIRADITYA SCINDIA S/O  LATE
       SHRIMANT MAHARAJA MADHORAO SCINDIA ,
       AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, SAFDARGANJ, NEW
       DELHI (DELHI)

3.     SMT MADHVI RAJE SCINDIA W/O LATE
       SHRIMANT MAHARAJA MADHORAO SCINDIA ,
       AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, SAFDARGANJ, NEW
       DELHI (MADHYA PRADESH)

4.     SMT PRIYADARSHNI RAJE W/O SHRIMANT
       JYOTIRADITYA SCINDIA , AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
       SAFDARGANJ, NEW DELHI (DELHI)

5.     SMT UJJWALA FALKE W/O SHRI VIJAY FALKE ,
       AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, USHA COLONY, LASHKAR
       (MADHYA PRADESH)

6.     BRIGADIER NRASINGH RAO PAWAR S/O SHRI
       BABURAO PAWAR , AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
       MANDRE KI MATA, LASHKAR (MADHYA
       PRADESH)

7.     SMT USHA RAJE RANA W/O SHRI RANA
       SHAMSHER     BAHADUR   SINGH VIJAYAVAS
       MAHARAJGANJ,    KATHMANDU     (MADHYA
       PRADESH)

8.     SMT   SUSHMA SINGH      W/O   LATE   SHRI
       DHARMENDRA BAHADUR SINGH , AGED ABOUT
       70 YEARS, VIJAY BHAWAN, JAIVILAS PARISAR
       (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                       .....RESPONDENTS
       (BY SHRI KRAN VIRWANI, ADVOCATE)

     This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                                                      2
             following:
                                                      ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties.

The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have filed an execution proceeding against eviction decree which is under challenge before this

Court in Second Appeal however in the execution proceeding dated 02.9.2021, the objection was filed which was rejected by the executing Court on the same day and the case was fixed for 17.9.2021 by issuing a possession warrant. On 06.9.2021, present petition judgment deter has filed an application under Order 21 Rule 11 of C.P.C that the decree for which the execution is sought is not being enclosed along with the execution application, therefore, the execution is barred under the provisions of Order 21 Rule 11 of C.P.C. The said application dated 06.9.2021 has been ordered to consider on 07.9.2021, however, without considering the application, the executing Court has issued the possession warrant which is contrary to record. Hence, this petition.

During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that this petition has rendered infructuous as the decree holder/ respondents received the possession of disputed place and the application for execution has been dismissed in full satisfaction. To support his contention, he has filed the order-sheet dated 27.9.2021 in Execution Case No. 32/2020 SCINDIA DEVSTHAN TRUST & Ors. v. POORAN SINGH & Ors.

On perusal of the above order-sheet, it appears that the executing Court has ended the execution proceedings in full satisfaction because the decree holder informed the Court about his receiving the vacant possession of the disputed place.

Since the disputed place has already been vacated by the petitioner, no purpose would be served in proceeding further with this petition. Hence, present petition is dismissed having rendered infructuous.


ALOK KUMAR
2022.03.03
14:39:22
+05'30'
11.0.20                                                                     (SUNITA YADAV)
                                                                                JUDGE
             AKS
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter