Full Text
Translation output
C.R.P. 41/2022
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
C.R.P. 41/2022
MOHD SIDIK ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. G. S. Sharma and Mr. V. K.
Sharma, Advs.
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
C.R.P. 41/2022
MOHD SIDIK ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. G. S. Sharma and Mr. V. K.
Sharma, Advs.
VERSUS
VINEETA GUPTA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through:
Date of Decision: 5th August, 2022
Through:
Date of Decision: 5th August, 2022
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
JUDGMENT
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J.
(Oral)
CM APPL. 34551/2022
The present application has been filed for stay of execution proceedings bearing Execution No. 121/2017 titled as “Vineeta Gupta &
Anr. Noor Alam & Anr” pending in the Court of learned PO, MACT—02, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner is the owner of the truck.
The award in this case was passed as back as 21st April, 2012. The order under challenge is the order passed by learned MACT on application under
Section 114 read with Section 151 CPC for review of judgment/award dated
21st April, 2012 2022:DHC:3046
The present application has been filed for stay of execution proceedings bearing Execution No. 121/2017 titled as “Vineeta Gupta &
Anr. Noor Alam & Anr” pending in the Court of learned PO, MACT—02, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner is the owner of the truck.
The award in this case was passed as back as 21st April, 2012. The order under challenge is the order passed by learned MACT on application under
Section 114 read with Section 151 CPC for review of judgment/award dated
21st April, 2012 2022:DHC:3046
C.R.P. 41/2022
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he is liable to succeed in his petition and therefore for the time being execution proceedings be stayed.
I am not impressed with the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The son of the respondent, a young boy namely Anuj Gupta lost the life in the accident. The petitioner had ample opportunity to contest the claim petition.
It is also relevant to note that the petitioner had preferred an appeal before this Court which was withdrawn by him in May, 2016.
This Court has to meet the balance between the contention of the petitioner and that of the respondent i.e. Legal Representative of the deceased.
In case, the petitioner succeeds, he may institute appropriate proceedings for recovery of the money. However, as of now, there is no ground for stay of execution proceedings, hence, the present application is dismissed.
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J AUGUST 5, 2022 Pallavi
2022:DHC:3046
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he is liable to succeed in his petition and therefore for the time being execution proceedings be stayed.
I am not impressed with the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The son of the respondent, a young boy namely Anuj Gupta lost the life in the accident. The petitioner had ample opportunity to contest the claim petition.
It is also relevant to note that the petitioner had preferred an appeal before this Court which was withdrawn by him in May, 2016.
This Court has to meet the balance between the contention of the petitioner and that of the respondent i.e. Legal Representative of the deceased.
In case, the petitioner succeeds, he may institute appropriate proceedings for recovery of the money. However, as of now, there is no ground for stay of execution proceedings, hence, the present application is dismissed.
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J AUGUST 5, 2022 Pallavi
2022:DHC:3046