Bhoj Raj Garg vs Goyal Educational And Welfare ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7444 P&H

CR-1811-2022 (O&M)                                                  1

122
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH

                               CR-1811-2022 (O&M)
                               Date of decision : 21.07.2022

Dr.Bhoj Raj Garg                                   ...Petitioner
                               Vs.

Goyal Education and Welfare Society
and others                                         ...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ BAJAJ

Present:    Mr. O.P.Goyal, Senior Advocate with
            Ms. Parul Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

                        ***
MANOJ BAJAJ, J.

CM-6768-CII-2022

Application is allowed as prayed for.

Documents are taken on record.

Main case

Decree-holder (petitioner) has approached this Court to

challenge the order dated 27.04.2022 (Annexure P-4) passed by Civil

Judge (Senior Division), Faridabad, whereby the executing court

proceeded to dismiss his application for pre-ponement/early hearing of

the case bearing Execution No.190/2019, titled "Bhoj Raj Garg Vs. Goyal

Educational and Welfare Society etc.".

Learned senior counsel has argued that the subject execution

petition arises from judgment and decree dated 18.01.2019, which was

filed on 20.03.2019, but the same is pending for a long time and the

1 of 2

Executing Court fell in error in dismissing the application for pre-

ponement. In support of his argument, he has relied upon the decision of

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in "Rahul S.Shah Vs. Jitender Gandhi

and others", 2021 AIR (SC) 2161, which has laid down a period of six

months for disposal of the execution petition from the date of filing.

During the course of hearing, it is not disputed by learned

senior counsel that subsequent to the filing of the execution petition

(Annexure P-2), the decree-holder had moved an application under Order

VI Rule 17 CPC to seek amendment and the same was allowed on

13.07.2022. He further states that the execution petition is being contested

by only defendant No.4 as the rest of the defendants have been proceeded

against ex parte.

Considering the above background, particularly the fact that

the amendment of the execution petition has been allowed just a few days

back, this Court is not inclined to exercise the superintendence powers

under Article 227 Constitution of India.

Dismissed.

                                                  (MANOJ BAJAJ)
                                                    JUDGE
21.07.2022
vanita
             Whether speaking/reasoned :            Yes     No
             Whether Reportable :                   Yes     No




                                 2 of 2