Mohd Yusuf v. Kanwar Singh Saini

Delhi High Court · 30 May 2025 · 2025:DHC:4786
Manoj Jain
CM(M) 1022/2025
2025:DHC:4786
civil petition_dismissed Significant

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court directed the Executing Court to dispose of the objection petition expeditiously, emphasizing adherence to Supreme Court mandates against undue delays in execution proceedings.

Full Text
Translation output
CM(M) 1022/2025 1
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 30th May, 2025
CM(M) 1022/2025 & CM APPL. 33542-33543/2025
MOHD YUSUF .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Shree Prakash Sinha
WITH
Mr. Rakesh Mishra and Mr. Rishabh Kumar, Advocates.
VERSUS
KANWAR SINGH SAINI SINCE DECEASED THOUGH LRS .....Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
JUDGMENT
(oral)

1. Petitioner is a decree holder and has filed an execution petition which is registered as EX. 200/2023 titled as Mohd Yusuf vs Kanwar Singh Saini.

2. It seems that in the abovesaid Execution Petition, some objection has been filed by the Judgment Debtor himself.

3. The abovesaid objection petition was taken up by learned Executing Court on 29.04.2025 and following order has been passed:- “18 EX 200/23 MOHD.

YUSUF VS.

KANWAR SINGH SAINI 29.04.2025 Present: Sh. Rakesh Mishra, Ld. counsel for the DH alongwith DH. Sh. Roshan Lal Saini, Ld. counsel for the JD alongwith LRs i.e. JDs No.1B/Sh. Vikram Saini and 1C/Sh. Gaurav Saini.

1. Arguments on objections heard.

2. Be listed for clarifications on 21.07.2025.” CM(M) 1022/2025 2

4. The sole grievance of the decree holder, and rightly so, is to the effect that the learned Execution Court should have decided the objections expeditiously, instead of postponing the objection petition for a period of around three months and that to for simply clarification and not even for orders.

5. This Court is conscious of the specific directions given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Periyammal v. V. Rajamani, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 507 which mandates expeditious disposal of Execution Petition.

6. When the arguments on the Objection Petition had been heard by the learned Execution Court, such a long date should not have been given.

7. None appears on behalf of respondents despite advance notice.

8. Be that as it may, in view of the facts presented before this Court, the present petition is disposed of with direction to learned Executing Court to take up the abovesaid petition afresh and to give a shorter date for disposal of the objection petition.

9. The parties are, accordingly, directed to appear before the learned Executing Court on 04.06.2025.

10. Learned Executing Court would, however, be at liberty to re-hear the arguments, if so required but once the arguments are concluded, the endeavour would be to dispose of the objection petition, as expeditiously as possible.

11. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

2,185 characters total

12. Order dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

JUDGE MAY 30, 2025/sw/JS