Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 9803 P&H
Judgement Date : 25 August, 2022
128
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh
Civil Revision No. 317 of 2020
Date of Decision: 25.08.2022
Raj Kumar
... Petitioner(s)
Versus
Sardool Singh
... Respondent(s)
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kshetarpal.
Present: Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate
for the petitioner(s).
Anil Kshetarpal, J.
1. The decree holder of a money decree assails the correctness of
the order passed by the Executing Court while dismissing the execution
petition on the ground that he has already received the entire outstanding
amount vide receipt dated 02.10.2014. A copy of the receipt has been
proved. In fact, the petitioner admits his signatures, however, claims that a
blank signed paper, left with his previous counsel, has been misused. The
Court, on appreciation of evidence, has found that the petitioner has failed to
substantiate the same. Moreover, the judgment debtor, after having filed the
regular second appeal, withdrew the same.
2. Though the learned counsel representing the petitioner has
made sincere attempts, however, failed to persuade this Court to take a
different view. While exercising the revisional jurisdiction, the scope of
interference is limited. In the absence of any perversity or material
irregularity, the revisional Court is not expected to interfere. It has also
1 of 2
come on record that the petitioner is a Commission Agent, whereas, the
respondent is an Agriculturist.
3. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, no ground is made out to
interfere. Hence, the present revision petition is dismissed.
(Anil Kshetarpal) Judge August 25, 2022 "DK"
Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
2 of 2
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!