High CourtsSingle Bench

Harbhajan Kaur vs Sardari Lal Kochhar and Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 28 May 1990 · Citation: (1990) 05 P&H CK 0124

HON’BLE JUDGES
J.V. Gupta, Acting C.J.
CASE NUMBER
Civil Revision No. 482 of 1990

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 228 words

J.V. Gupta, ACJ

1.

This revision petition is directed against the order of the executing Court dated December 22, 1987. whereby the warrants of sale were issued. At the time of motion hearing, the execution proceedings as well as auction proceedings were stayed.

2.

According to the judgment-debtor petitioner, she has filed objections to the attachment of the house but the same have not been disposed of and the executing Court is proceeding with the sale of the said house.

3.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the decree-holder respondent submitted that the conduct of the judgment-debtor is such that she does not appear on the dates of hearing and is unnecessarily delaying the proceedings.

4.

After hearing the learned counsel, it is directed that the objections, if any filed to the attachment of the house by the judgment-debtor be disposed of before the property attached is ordered to be auctioned. In order to avoid any delay, it is directed that the objector will be given only one opportunity to lead her entire evidence at the her own responsibility, failing which, her evidence will stand concluded.

5.

The parties are directed to appear in the executing Court on June 12,1990. On the date, the executing Court will give another date for the evidence of the judgment-debtor at her own responsibility.

6.

The petition is disposed of accordingly.