Full Text
Translation output
A-7 & A-15
%25.7.2011
Present Ms.Anju Jain and Mr.Hitesh Sacher, Advocates for the petitioner in CM No.544/2011.
Mr.Manu Nayar and Mr.Lalit Grover, Advocate for the petitioner in CM(M) No. 768/2011.
Mr.Lalit Gupta, Advocate for respondent no. 1.
+CM(M) No.544/2011 & CM(M) No.768/2011
*
The order impugned before this Court is the order dated 20.5.2011 whereby the objections filed by three objectors qua the different portions of the mortgaged property had been dismissed for non prosecution.
Court had noted that even on earlier date i.e. 23.4.2010 none had appeared for the said objections/petitioners. Today before this Court there are two objectors namely M/s P.B. Apartment Owners Association and Sadhna Vohra. The third objector/petitioner whose objections had been dismissed in default was H.S.Khemka. He has not assailed the said order. After some arguments it has been agreed between the parties that the executing court be granted permission to deal with the objections of
MIs P.B. Apartment Owners Association and Sadhna Vohra on their merits. The objections of M/s P.B. Apartment Owners Association and
Sadhna Vohra is accordingly restored; the executing court will deal with the same on merits; it is made clear that the original objections filed by
MIs P.B. Apartment Owners Association and Sadhna Vohra will be the subject matter of the disposal before the executing court. The decree holder is permitted to execute the decree against those persons/units who have either not filed their objections or whose objections have been dismissed.
2011:DHC:18912
With these directions the petition is disposed of.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
JULY 25, 2011 nandan
Is
I
2011:DHC:18912
Present Ms.Anju Jain and Mr.Hitesh Sacher, Advocates for the petitioner in CM No.544/2011.
Mr.Manu Nayar and Mr.Lalit Grover, Advocate for the petitioner in CM(M) No. 768/2011.
Mr.Lalit Gupta, Advocate for respondent no. 1.
+CM(M) No.544/2011 & CM(M) No.768/2011
*
The order impugned before this Court is the order dated 20.5.2011 whereby the objections filed by three objectors qua the different portions of the mortgaged property had been dismissed for non prosecution.
Court had noted that even on earlier date i.e. 23.4.2010 none had appeared for the said objections/petitioners. Today before this Court there are two objectors namely M/s P.B. Apartment Owners Association and Sadhna Vohra. The third objector/petitioner whose objections had been dismissed in default was H.S.Khemka. He has not assailed the said order. After some arguments it has been agreed between the parties that the executing court be granted permission to deal with the objections of
MIs P.B. Apartment Owners Association and Sadhna Vohra on their merits. The objections of M/s P.B. Apartment Owners Association and
Sadhna Vohra is accordingly restored; the executing court will deal with the same on merits; it is made clear that the original objections filed by
MIs P.B. Apartment Owners Association and Sadhna Vohra will be the subject matter of the disposal before the executing court. The decree holder is permitted to execute the decree against those persons/units who have either not filed their objections or whose objections have been dismissed.
2011:DHC:18912
With these directions the petition is disposed of.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
JULY 25, 2011 nandan
Is
I
2011:DHC:18912
JUDGMENT