Punjab-Haryana High Court

Mahesh And Ors vs Nirmala Devi on 1 May, 2024

Author: Anil Kshetarpal

Bench: Anil Kshetarpal

                                        Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:059666



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH
119                                                               2024:PHHC:059666
                                                   CR-1881-2018
                                                   Date of decision: 01.05.2024

MAHESH AND ORS                                         ..Petitioner
                                     Versus
NIRMALA DEVI                                           ..Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
Present:      Mr. Aayush Gupta, Advocate
              for the petitioner.

              Mr. Sandeep Kotla, Advocate
              for respondent.

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J(Oral)

1. This revision petition has been filed by the judgment debtor to

challenge the correctness of Executing Court's order dated 04.01.2018,

which has resulted in the amendment of the judgment and decree passed by

the trial Court.

2. In order to comprehend the issues involved in the present case,

certain relevant facts, in brief, are required to be noticed.

3. The respondent filed a suit for possession by way of specific

performance of the agreement to sell, which was decreed on 17.08.2017. The

plaintiff was granted the alternative relief of recovery of Rs.13,00,000/-

along with interest at the rate of 9%, however, the date from which the 9%

interest was to be awarded was not specified. The execution petition was

filed by the decree holder. The Executing Court has held that there is an

error in the judgment passed by the Court, however, the judgment debtor has

been directed to pay the amount along with interest at the rate of 9% per

annum from the date of the agreement to sell.

4. This Bench has heard the learned counsel representing the

parties at length and with their able assistance perused the paperbook.

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:059666

2024:PHHC:059666

5. In the considered opinion of this Court, the Executing Court

was not required to dispose of the matter in such manner. The appropriate

course was to relegate the decree holder to the alternative remedy of filing of

the application before the same Court for amendment of the judgment and

decree passed in case the judgment and decree was vague and uncertain.

6. On being confronted with the aforesaid position, the learned

counsel representing the respondent submits that he will file an application

for amendment of the judgment and decree in accordance with law.

7. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the revision petition is

allowed. The impugned order is set aside with liberty to the respondent to

file an application for amendment of the judgment and decree.

8. If such application is filed within a period of 15 days from

today, the same shall be decided on merits.

9. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also

disposed of.

May 01st, 2024                                         (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
Ay                                                          JUDGE

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




                                       2 of 2