Harjit Singh vs Supinder Singh And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 7223 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Harjit Singh vs Supinder Singh And Others on 4 April, 2024

Author: Anil Kshetarpal

Bench: Anil Kshetarpal

                                   Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:046129




CR-6406-2023(O&M)                                            2024:PHHC:046129
                                                                      1


138         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

                                                 CR-6406-2023(O&M)
                                                 Date of decision :04.04.2024

Harjit Singh                                                 ...Petitioner

                                           Vs.

Supinder Singh and others                                    ...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

Present:    Mr. Rajbir Singh, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

                          ****

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner herein is a decree-holder. The objection petition

filed by the Judgment Debtor No.3 has been accepted. He is purchaser of the

property for valuable sale consideration from the Judgment Debtors No. 1 and

2. The petitioner filed a suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell

claiming that the defendants No.1 and 2 being owners had entered into

agreement to sell upon receipt of Rs. 36,56,000/-. The Judgment Debtor No.3

being the purchaser was impleaded as a party. The Court granted alternative

relief of recovery of the amount from the plaintiff. No specific decree against

the Judgment Debtor No.3 was passed. In the facts of the case, the Executing

Court has held that the Judgment Debtor No. 3 is not liable to pay the amount.

The amount can be recovered only from the Judgment Debtors No. 1 and 2.

The aforesaid observation has been upheld in the appeal.

2. Learned counsel representing the petitioner contends that the

decree has been passed against all the defendants, which has become final

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:046129

CR-6406-2023(O&M) 2024:PHHC:046129

between the parties. He submits that the petitioner is entitled to recover the

amount from any of the Judgment Debtor.

3. This Court has considered the submissions of learned counsel

representing the petitioner and pursued the judgment passed by the Court while

granting alternative relief to the plaintiff. It is evident that no specific decree

against Judgment Debtor No.3 has been passed. There is no specific issue that

the Judgment Debtor No.3 is liable to pay the amount to the plaintiff. It is

admitted position that the Judgment Debtors No.1 and 2 received the amount.

The Judgment Debtor No.3 has purchased the property by registered sale deed

after paying valuable consideration to the defendants No 1 and 2. Hence, the

Judgment Debtor No.3 is not liable to pay the amount to the plaintiff. Though,

the decree passed by the Court is vague, however, upon comprehensive reading

of the judgment passed by the trial Court while decreeing plaintiff's suit for

recovery, it is evident that the Court intended to pass decree for recovery only

against the Judgment Debtors No. 1 and 2.

4. Hence, no ground for interference is made out.

5. Dismissed.

                                                       (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
04.04.2024                                                  JUDGE
neeraj       Whether speaking/reasoned :         Yes          No
             Whether Reportable :                Yes          No




                                      2 of 2