Punjab-Haryana High Court
Baljinder Singh And Others vs Shiv Mandir Kalyan Dharam Arth Society ... on 2 May, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060595
CR-2644-2024 (O&M) 1 2024:PHHC:060595
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
129 CR-2644-2024 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 02.05.2024
BALJINDER SINGH AND OTHERS
... Petitioners
VERSUS
SHIV MANDIR KALYAN DHARAM ARTH
SOCIETY AND ANOTHER
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE
Present: Ms. Balpreet K. Sidhu, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. S. S. Grewal, Advocate
for respondent No.1.
*****
RITU TAGORE, J. (Oral)
1. The present civil revision is for setting aside order dated
24.04.2024 (Annexure P-1) passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior
Division) in Exe.293-2019 titled 'Shiv Manir Kalyan Dharam Arth Vs.
Gram Panchayat'.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that earlier
petitioner No.1 was the Sarpanch and petitioners No.2 and 3 were the
members of the Gram Panchayat. It is stated that the matter in hand is
between the respondents and Gram Panchayat of village Kalyan Malka
(respondent No.2) and after dissolution of Panchayats in State of Punjab
28.02.2024, the petitioners No.1 to 3 left with no authority or power to
deal with the issue in hand. It is stated that they have no concern with
the Gram Panchayat after the dissolution of Gram Panchayat. The
issuance of arrest-warrant vide order dated 24.04.2024 (Annexure P-1)
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060595
CR-2644-2024 (O&M) 2 2024:PHHC:060595
passed by Learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) in
Execution Petition No.293-2019 is wholly wrong and in violation of the
provisions of Section 51 and Order 21 Rule 37 CPC. No show cause
notice as provided under Order 21 Rule 37 CPC was given to them
before issuance of warrants. Further it is submitted that the petitioners
have no personal interest in the suit property as there is no decree
against them.
3. Notice of motion.
4. Mr.S. S. Grewal, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent
No.1 and files Power of Attorney, which is taken on record, subject to
just exceptions.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that show
cause notice is not necessary to be issued under Order 21 Rule 37 CPC
if the Court is satisfied that judgment debtor is delaying the execution of
decree. Learned counsel further submits that in view of the submissions
made by learned counsel for the petitioners, appropriate order may be
passed in the present revision petition.
6. Perusal of the judgement dated 24.08.2013 titled 'Shiv
Mandir Kalyan Dharam Arth Society (Regd.) village Luthar, Tehsil and
District Ferozepur through Batimams/Mohitmim Surinder Pal Sharma
s/o Late Pt. Durga Parshad Sharma Vs. Gram Panchayat village Kalyan
Malka, Tehsil and District Bathinda, through Sarpanch' (Annexure P-4)
shows that the aforesaid suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff ex
parte against the Gram Panchayat. Present petitioners are not party in
the aforesaid suit. Examination of the impugned order shows that no
show cause notice as provided under Order 21 Rule 37 CPC was given
to them before issuance of warrants. Further, in view of the statement
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:060595
CR-2644-2024 (O&M) 3 2024:PHHC:060595
made by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have no
connection with the Gram Panchayat on dissolution of the Gram
Panchayat on 28.02.2024, and now, they are not holding any office in
the Gram Panchayat in any capacity, accordingly, order dated
24.04.2024 (Annexure P-1) regarding issuance of warrants of arrest
against petitioners No.1 to 3 is set aside. Insofar as the petitioner No.4
is concerned, only show cause notice has been issued against him,
therefore, calls for no interference at this stage.
7. Accordingly, this revision petition is disposed of in above
terms.
(RITU TAGORE)
02.05.2024 JUDGE
Rimpal
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
