Sarabjit Kaur vs Piara Singh
2022 Latest Caselaw 17073 P&H

                                                                          Page 1 of 4


111

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                              CHANDIGARH
                                                       TA-1558-2022
                                           DATE OF ORDER: 16.12.2022

Sarabjit Kaur
                                                                .....Petitioner

                                          Vs.

Piara Singh
                                                                .....Respondent



CORAM:                HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA


Present:              Mr. N.S. Sodhi, Advocate for the petitioner.


Nidhi Gupta, J.

By way of present Transfer Application, the petitioner is

seeking withdrawal of proceedings of Execution Application No.6 of 2020

titled as "Sarbjit Kaur Vs. Piara Singh" from the Court of learned Civil Judge

(Junior Division), Nakodar, District Jalandhar and entrusting the same to any

other Court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar.

The only submission made on behalf of the learned

counsel for the petitioner is that "the execution proceedings are prima facie

illegal and vitiated as the given site plan is not tallying with the spot structure

and dimension as well as location of the house".

A few undisputed facts which need to be noticed herein

are that the petitioner had taken the house in dispute on rent from the

respondent-owner in the year 2010 at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per month. As

the petitioner was not paying the rent regularly, accordingly, the respondent

1 of 4

filed an ejectment application under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban

Rent Restriction Act, 1949 which was allowed in favour of the respondent

vide ex parte judgment and decree dated 08.03.2017. A perusal of the said

judgment and decree (Annexure P2) shows that the petitioner had

repeatedly failed to be present for the proceedings before the learned Rent

Controller, Nakodar and accordingly, he was proceeded against ex parte.

Thereafter, the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the aforesaid

judgment and decree dated 08.03.2017 was dismissed by the learned

Appellate Court vide order dated 12.07.2019. Accordingly, the

respondent/decree holder sought execution of the decree dated 08.03.2017

under Order 21 Rule 11 CPC. Objections filed by the petitioner in the

execution proceedings were dismissed by the learned Executing Court.

During these execution proceedings, the petitioner filed an application

before the learned District Judge, Jalandhar seeking transfer of the instant

execution proceedings from the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Nakodar to Civil Courts at Jalandhar on the ground that the said Court had

not heard the petitioner properly nor considered the objections filed by her.

Vide order dated 06.12.2022, learned District Judge, Jalandhar has dismissed

this application filed by the petitioner for transfer of execution proceedings;

whereupon the present transfer application has been filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to controvert

the above findings which are borne out from the record of the case to the

effect that the appeal filed by the petitioner/judgment debtor against

judgment and decree dated 08.03.2017 has been dismissed by the Appellate

Court vide order dated 12.07.2019; and that the objections filed by the

2 of 4

petitioner/judgment debtor were also dismissed by the learned Presiding

Officer after hearing both the parties. Moreover, prayer in the present

application is for seeking transfer/withdrawal of Execution proceedings

pending before ld. Civil Judge, (Junior Division), Nakodar. As such, it is not

open to this Court to consider the merits of the matter in the present

proceeding.

Further, regarding the prayer of the petitioner for

transfer/withdrawal of Execution proceedings pending before ld. Civil Judge,

(Junior Division), Nakodar as "the petitioner has not faith on the presiding

officer/executing court, that she will get justice ...", this Court finds such a

prayer most reprehensible, as it is not in the petitioner's mouth to level such

baseless allegations. A perusal of order dated 06.12.2022 shows that the

learned District Judge had called for comments of the learned Presiding

Officer wherein the allegations levelled by the petitioner were refuted. A

finding has also been recorded by the learned District Judge that "There is

nothing on the record to show that the learned Presiding Officer is biased

against the applicant".

I am in concurrence with the findings of the learned

District Judge that the contention of the petitioner is "totally absurd". As

noticed above, the petitioner's appeal against order of eviction by the Rent

Controller already stands dismissed and the ground sought to be raised by

her before this Court to the effect that the site plan is not tallying with the

spot structure and dimension or location of the house, were for the

consideration of the learned Rent Controller and the lower Appellate Court.

3 of 4

Accordingly, I find no merit in this Petition and the same

is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.

16.12.2022                                            (Nidhi Gupta)
Sunena                                                  Judge


         Whether speaking/reasoned                    Yes/No
         Whether reportable                           Yes/No




                                   4 of 4