[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Manipur High Court
Vinod Kumar Sharma And Anr vs Radha Krishna And 6 Ors on 21 January, 2026
JOHN
TELEN KOM
Item No. 8-11
Digitally signed by
JOHN TELEN KOM
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
Date: 2026.01.21 AT IMPHAL
18:35:11 +05'30'
CRP(CRP.Art.227) No. 29 of 2025
With
MC(CRP(CRP.Art.227) No. 39 of 2025
With
MC(CRP(CRP.Art.227) No. 45 of 2025
With
MC(CRP(CRP.Art.227) No. 67 of 2025
Vinod Kumar Sharma and Anr.
Petitioner/s
Vrs.
Radha Krishna and 6 Ors.
Respondent/s
BEFORE
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR
(ORDER)
21.01.2026
Read this in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier
proceedings made in the previous listing on 29.10.2025 which reads as
follows:
[1] Read this in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier
proceedings made in the previous listings, more particularly, the
proceedings made in the listing on 17.10.2025.
[2] Today, Mr. A. Golly, learned counsel for the two revision
petitioners and Mr. Sarvan Kumar, learned counsel for respondents 1-5 and
7 are before this Court.
[3] Previous proceeding dated 17.10.2025 reads as follows :
'17.10.2025.
Read this in conjunction and in continuation of the earlier
proceedings made in previous listing on 15.10.2025 which reads as follows:
"There is no representation for the 2(two) revision petitioners either in the
physical Court or on the VC platform.
Mr. Sarvan Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and
proforma respondent No.7 is before physical Court and the learned counsel
is ready to make submission.
This matter stand over to day after tomorrow (17.10.2025) for the purpose
of giving opportunity to 2(two) revision petitioners and their counsel.
Be that as it may, as regards 6th respondent, though case file shows that
notice had been dispatched by Speed Post with the acknowledgement card,
proof of service is yet to be filed.
This Court is informed by the Registry that proof of service is yet to be filed
by the revision petitioners. This aspect i.e., aspect regarding service qua 6th
respondent will be examined in the next listing, day after tomorrow.
As regards the undertaking given by the revision petitioners on 09.10.2025
i.e., undertaking that the petitioners are not doing any civil construction
work and will not put any civil construction work as well as the interim
order already granted on 27.05.2025, extended from time to time, last
extended on 13.10.2025 and now operating, will stand extended till next
listing i.e., day after tomorrow."
2. Today Mr. A. Golly, learned counsel on record for the 2 revision
petitioners is before this Court (physical Court).
3. Mr. Sarvan Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and
proforma respondent No.7 is before this Court on the video conferencing
platform.
4. Adverting to earlier proceeding dated 15.10.2025, Mr. A. Golly,
learned counsel for revision petitioners submitted that notice to all the
respondents was issued by this Court on 27.05.2025 and pursuant to
27.05.2025 judicial order, steps were taken on 29.05.2025 itself the
acknowledgment in this regard has been placed before this Court and a
scanned reproduction of the same is as follows:
5. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that he is yet to file the
consignment track report and he will do so by Monday i.e., 27.10.2025. If
it is not done by close of court working hours on Monday, it is made clear
that CRP against respondent No.6 will stand dismissed and matter will be
heard out on merits.
6. As regards undertaking by the revision petitioners and interim order as
captured in the 15.10.2025 proceeding, the same will continue till next
listing which will be on 29.10.2025.
7. List on 29.10.2025. '
[4] As would be evident from the proceedings made in the
previous listing on 17.10.2025, the issue surrounds effecting service
qua R6. Though arrayed as R6, technically, there are 6 (six)
individuals. This, in the considered view of this court, comes across
as procedurally incorrect. Be that as it may, there is no dispute
between the parties that all the six individuals are legal heirs of late
Purnananda Sharma who is judgment debtor in Executing Court.
Therefore, effecting service on the six individuals has become
necessary. To be noted, of the six individuals, one is no more viz.,
Smt. Kamla Devi Sharma, wife of Purnananda Sharma. Therefore,
service has to be effected on five individuals. As regards 5 (five)
individuals, Smt. Kaushalya Sharma is revision petitioner's sister-in-
law being wife of their deceased elder brother Mahendrakumar
Sharma who predeceased Purnananda Sharma and died in May of
1989. Second individual Shri Nishanka Sharma is Kaushalya Sharma's
son and he is residing in Haryana with his mother. Third individual
Taressa Sharma is daughter of deceased Mahendrakumar Sharma
and she is residing in Mumbai. Fourth and fifth individuals i.e., Bharti
Joshi and Aruna Sharma are blood sisters of revision petitioners.
[5] The above details have been given to the court by Mr.
A. Golly, learned counsel for revision petitioners, on instructions from
first revision petitioner Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma, S/o late
Purnananda Sharma who is present in court and who is instructing
him. These submissions are recorded.
[6] On behalf of Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Mr. A. Golly
seeks a short accommodation to get instructions from Mr. Vinod
Kumar Sharma's afore-referred sister-in-law, nephew, niece and two
sisters and revert to this Court. Let the same be done.
[7] As learned counsel for R1 to R5 and R7 raises an issue
regarding the copy of the impugned order dated 14.05.2025 made
by the executing court (to be noted, learned counsel says that it is
in variance with the original) and as it is not clear as to whether all
the respondents were served in the executing court, Registry to
requisition the entire records in E.P. No. 48 of 2017 (previously E.P.
No. 17 of 2013 and E.P. No. 9 of 2012) on the file of Civil Judge,
Senior Division, Imphal West.
[8] Both sides also submitted that they will explore the
possibility of agreeing on a mediator and report to this Court. Let the
same also be done.
[9] Records received from the executing court shall be
retained in a sealed envelope in the office of the Registrar (Judicial)
and the same shall be produced in the next listing which shall be on
04.11.2025.
[10] As regards the undertaking given by the revision
petitioners and the interim order as captured in 15.10.2025
proceedings the same shall continue until further orders.
2. In the hearing today, Mr. A. Golly, learned counsel for two
revision petitioners and Mr. Sarvan Kumar, learned counsel for respondent
Nos. 1 to 5 and respondent No.7 are before this Court(physical Court).
3. Adverting to afore-referred 29.10.2025 proceedings and more
particularly, an affidavit dated 04.11.2025 (Affidavit of Mr. Vinod Kumar
Sharma S/o Late Purnananda Sharma) Mr. A. Golly, learned counsel for
revision petitioners submits that he would now be representing all the five
individuals namely Smt. Kaushalya Sharma, Shri Nishanka Sharam, Terssa
Sharma, Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma and Shri Deepak Sharma who have been
shown as ii) to vi) of R6. To be noted that i) Smt. Kamala Devi Sharma wife
of late Shri Purnanada Sharma is no more and date of demise is 23.03.2013.
4. The above means that all the parties to the captioned CRP are
before this Court.
5. Be that as it may be, as regards paragraph 8 of 29.10.2025
proceedings, from the submissions made at the Bar, it comes to light that
there is no consensus about mediation much less about a mediator.
Therefore, this dimension of the matter i.e., this aspect of the matter is given
a closure. As regard the original records from the executing Court, the same
have been received and the same have been placed before this Court in a
sealed envelope.
6. Sealed envelope was opened in Court and learned counsel on
both sides also have the benefit of perusing the records.
7. The narrative thus far means that the main CRP has to be heard
out now.
8. While Mr. Sarvan Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent
Nos. 1 to 5 and 7 submits that he is ready, Mr. A. Golly, learned counsel
submits that there is difficulty in briefing Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior
advocate who is appearing on his behalf and requests for a short
accommodation.
9. In light of the trajectory the matter has taken thus far, it is
made clear that the next listing will be treated as peremptory and main CRP
will be heard out in full.
10. The records received from the executing Court shall be put back
in sealed envelope kept with the Registrar(Judicial) and the same shall be
placed before this Court again in the next listing.
11. List on 29.01.2026.
CHIEF JUSTICE
Ab. Surjit
