Full Text
Translation output
\ HIGH COURT OF DELHI
EX.F.A.26/2019,CM APPLNo.31237/2019
M/S EDIT JUNCTION VFX & ANR Appellants
Through: Mr.Akshay Singh, Mr.Madhav Sharma,Advocates.
EX.F.A.26/2019,CM APPLNo.31237/2019
M/S EDIT JUNCTION VFX & ANR Appellants
Through: Mr.Akshay Singh, Mr.Madhav Sharma,Advocates.
VERSUS
GAURAV CHOPRA
Through: None.
/ EX.F.A.27/2019,CM APPLNo.31238/2019 M/S EDIT JUNCTION VFX & ANR
Through: Mr.Akshay Singh, Sharma,Advocates.
Respondent .. Appellants Mr.Madhav
Through: None.
/ EX.F.A.27/2019,CM APPLNo.31238/2019 M/S EDIT JUNCTION VFX & ANR
Through: Mr.Akshay Singh, Sharma,Advocates.
Respondent .. Appellants Mr.Madhav
VERSUS
NIKHIL CHOPRA
Through: None.
Respondent
Through: None.
Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
15.07.2019 These appeals are against the dismissal of objections vide impugned order dated 20.03.2019 modified vide order dated
29.04.2019 passed in Execution petition 1^0.2564/2016. The brief facts are a suit for recovery under Order XXXVII CPC was filed by the respondent herein against the three defendants including the appellant herein. The appellant along with other two defendants
2019:DHC:7719 allegedly were to make payment ofthe dues to the respondent and had issue a cheque of?3,00,046/-, dishonoured on presentation. On the basis ofthe avermentqua dues and qua dishonour ofthe cheque,a suit for recovery was filed by the respondent herein and it was decreed against the appellant herein and two others for a sum of
^3,00,046/- pluspendentlite and futureinterest@of10%p.a.
The appellant herein did not challenge the impugned order in appeal but instead preferred the objections before the executing
Court. Since the appeal was not filed, the executing Court held it cannot go beyond the decree and dismissed the objections. It is argued the respondent had also filed a petition under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act but it was dismissed holding the cheque was forged and.hence it is argued the said
15.07.2019 These appeals are against the dismissal of objections vide impugned order dated 20.03.2019 modified vide order dated
29.04.2019 passed in Execution petition 1^0.2564/2016. The brief facts are a suit for recovery under Order XXXVII CPC was filed by the respondent herein against the three defendants including the appellant herein. The appellant along with other two defendants
2019:DHC:7719 allegedly were to make payment ofthe dues to the respondent and had issue a cheque of?3,00,046/-, dishonoured on presentation. On the basis ofthe avermentqua dues and qua dishonour ofthe cheque,a suit for recovery was filed by the respondent herein and it was decreed against the appellant herein and two others for a sum of
^3,00,046/- pluspendentlite and futureinterest@of10%p.a.
The appellant herein did not challenge the impugned order in appeal but instead preferred the objections before the executing
Court. Since the appeal was not filed, the executing Court held it cannot go beyond the decree and dismissed the objections. It is argued the respondent had also filed a petition under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act but it was dismissed holding the cheque was forged and.hence it is argued the said
ORDER
of criminal complaint would be binding on Civil Court, which per se is wrong.
Since the appellant ought to have filed an appeal against the judgment before the Court of appropriate jurisdiction and since he failed to do so there was.no.other alternative remedy available to the executing Courtbutto dismiss the objections.There is no illegality in the impugned order hence this appeal is meritless and is dismissed.
Pending applications also stands disposed ofin terms ofabove.
X
YOGESH KHANNA,J.
JULY 15,2019 2019:DHC:7719
Since the appellant ought to have filed an appeal against the judgment before the Court of appropriate jurisdiction and since he failed to do so there was.no.other alternative remedy available to the executing Courtbutto dismiss the objections.There is no illegality in the impugned order hence this appeal is meritless and is dismissed.
Pending applications also stands disposed ofin terms ofabove.
X
YOGESH KHANNA,J.
JULY 15,2019 2019:DHC:7719