M/s Guru Nank Rice Mills & Ors. v. M/s Mittal Traders
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
the present revision petition stands dismissed
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 227
Judgment
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. C.M.Munjal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sandeep Khunger, Advocate for the respondent. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) Petitioners have invoked supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashment of order dated
16.10.2010 passed by learned Civil Judge(Junior Division), Ferozepur. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned executing Court. CR No.7478 of 2010 2 Brief facts relevant for the decision of present revision petition are that, suit filed by respondent-Decree Holder against the present petitioners-Judgment Debtors was decreed in his favour vide judgment and decree dated 14.12.2007. Appeal filed by the present petitioners against the said judgment and decree was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated
03.03.2008 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Ferozepur. Regular Second appeal was also filed before this Court by the present petitioners-JD, which was also dismissed on 19.11.2009. Thereafter, execution petition was filed by the present respondent-Decree Holder in which impugned order was passed vide which conditional warrants of the present petitioners-Judgment Debtors have been issued against which the present revision petition has been filed. When the present revision petition came up for hearing before this Court, a coordinate Bench of this Court passed the following order on
29.11.2010:- “Mr.Munjal undertakes to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- lacs within a period of one week and to pay the balance amount within six months from today. In view of the said undertaking, notice of motion for
Operative part
7.2.2011. The arrest warrants shall remain stayed only if the petitioners deposit Rs.2,00,000/- within one week before the learned Executing Court.” CR No.7478 of 2010 3 In view of the said undertaking, though petitioner has paid part decretal amount i.e. total `5,00,000/- in all, on different dates to the respondent and however, remaining decretal amount remains to be paid. On the last date of hearing a date was sought by learned counsel for the petitioner-Judgment Debtor for making the payment of remaining amount and however, petitioner has not come present today. It has been fairly conceded by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is not ready to comply with the undertaking given before this Curt on 29.11.2010. Hence, in view of the aforementioned facts, as petitioner has failed to comply with the undertaking given before this Court on 29.11.2010, the present revision petition stands dismissed. November 4, 2011. 'om’ ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: the present revision petition stands dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 227.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 04 Nov 2011. The bench was RAM CHAND GUPTA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.