Laxmi vs Pale Ram And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 21548 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Laxmi vs Pale Ram And Others on 11 December, 2023

Author: Anil Kshetarpal

Bench: Anil Kshetarpal

                                                   Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:158550




                                        2023:PHHC:158550
144 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                  AT CHANDIGARH

                                        CR-179-2023 (O&M)
                                        Date of decision: 11.12.2023

Laxmi
                                               ....Petitioner

             Versus


Pale Ram and others
                                              ..Respondent


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL


Present:-    Mr. Abhinav Sood, Advocate for
             Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner

             Mr. Kulvir Narwal and
             Mr. Shubham Chaudhary, Advocates for the respondent


ANIL KSHETARPAL, J (Oral)

1. This revision petition has been filed by the judgment

debtor to challenge the correctness of the order passed by the

Executing Court on 22.12.2022. The petitioner's application for

adjourning the execution petition sine die has been dismissed by the

Executing Court. The correctness of the aforesaid order has been

challenged in this revision petition.

2. Learned counsel representing the petitioner contends

that the petitioner is a bonafide purchaser of the property and her

application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure,

1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC') is pending. He submits that

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:158550

CR-179-2023 (O&M) 2 2023:PHHC:158550

the execution proceedings shall be kept in abeyance till the final

decision is arrived at on the application under Order IX Rule 13

CPC.

3. On the other hand, the learned counsel representing the

respondent submits that the petitioner is delaying the decision in

application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC. The learned counsel

representing the petitioner before the trial court has already taken 7-

8 adjournments for leading evidence. He further submits that the

suit was filed by the respondent on 25.05.2011, whereas the sale

deed in favour of the petitioner is dated 23.08.2011, and her vendor

was party to the suit.

4. This Court has considered the submissions made by the

learned counsel representing the parties. It is evident that the

proceedings for setting aside the ex-parate decree is pending. The

attention of the Court has not been drawn to the provision which

provides for staying the execution proceedings during the pendency

of the application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC. In any case, the

petitioner, if so advised, may file an application for staying all the

execution proceedings in the application under Order IX Rule 13

CPC.

5. With these observations, the revison petition is

disposed of.

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:158550

CR-179-2023 (O&M) 3 2023:PHHC:158550

6. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are

also disposed of.

11.12.2023                                   (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
rekha                                              JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned :      Yes/No
Whether reportable :             Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:158550

3 of 3