Cr No. 3231 of 2026 · Punjab And Haryana High Court · 2026
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, both the revisions are disposed of with the following
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 99. Accordingly, both the revisions are disposed of with the following direc(cid:30)ons: (cid:1) The pe(cid:30)(cid:30)oners shall deposit the en(cid:30)re amount of mesne profits pay- able in terms of order dated 12.01.2026. Page No. 3 of 4 Pages CR-3231-2026 CR-3257-2026 (cid:1) FiHy per cent of the…
Judgment
Ms. Ratan Bhandari and Others .….Respondents Vs. Date of Decision.: 17.04.2026 CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present: - Mr. Lekh Raj Sharma, Mr. Kri(cid:30)ka Sagar Sharma and Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Ms. Sandhya Gaur, Advocates, for the pe(cid:30)(cid:30)oner (in CR-3231-2026) Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Lekh Raj Sharma, Mr. Kri(cid:30)ka Sagar Sharma and Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Ms. Sandhya Gaur, Advocates, for the pe(cid:30)(cid:30)oner (in CR-3257-2026) Mr. Brij Mohan Vinayak and Mr. Kunal Vinayak, Advocates, for respondents No.1 to 7/caveators (in CR-3257-2026). DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) **** Both these revisions arise out of the same li(cid:30)ga(cid:30)on between the par(cid:30)es and, therefore, are being decided together.
The suit filed by the plain(cid:30)ffs (respondent Nos.1 to 7 herein) was decreed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Amritsar, vide judgment & decree dated 25.08.2021, gran(cid:30)ng the following reliefs: CR-3231-2026 CR-3257-2026 a. Decree for possession of land measuring 101 kanals 14 marlas, being the subject ma?er of the impugned sale deed dated 18.07.2005, with a direc(cid:30)on to defendants No.1 to 3, 3A to 3J and defendants No.13 to 15, including subsequent purchasers, to hand over possession to the plain(cid:30)ffs as reflected in the jamabandi for the year 2017-18. b. Decree for declara(cid:30)on that the power of a?orney dated 11.03.2004, sale deed dated 18.07.2005, consequen(cid:30)al sale deed dated
16.05.2006 and subsequent sale deed dated 30.10.2012 were illegal, null and void and conferred no right, (cid:30)tle or interest upon the pur- chasers. c. Decree of permanent injunc(cid:30)on restraining the defendants from fur- ther aliena(cid:30)ng any part of the suit property. d. Decree for recovery of mesne profits/charges for unauthorized use and occupa(cid:30)on at the rate of ₹5,08,500/- per annum, subject to de- posit of ad valorem court fee by the plain(cid:30)ffs.
Aggrieved against the aforesaid judgment and decree, the de- fendants preferred an appeal. During pendency of the appeal, the learned Addi(cid:30)onal District Judge, Amritsar, while deciding an applica(cid:30)on under Or- der XLI Rule 5 CPC vide order dated 12.01.2026, stayed opera(cid:30)on of the de- cree subject to payment of mesne profits at the rate of ₹40,000/- per killa per year in respect of the suit land measuring 101 kanals 14 marlas. The ap- pellants were directed to deposit the said amount before the trial Court within one month of accrual, failing which the interim protec(cid:30)on was to stand vacated automa(cid:30)cally.
It is not disputed before this Court that the pe(cid:30)(cid:30)oners-defend- ants failed to comply with the aforesaid condi(cid:30)onal order. Consequently, the decree-holders ini(cid:30)ated execu(cid:30)on proceedings. The learned Execu(cid:30)ng Page No. 2 of 4 Pages CR-3231-2026 CR-3257-2026 Court, vide order dated 27.03.2026, declined the prayer for stay of execu- (cid:30)on and issued warrants of possession through the concerned Tehsildar. ThereaHer, another applica(cid:30)on for stay was also dismissed on 07.04.2026.
Order dated 12.01.2026 passed by the learned Addi(cid:30)onal District Judge has been challenged in CR No.3231 of 2026, whereas orders dated
27.03.2026 and 07.04.2026 passed by the Execu(cid:30)ng Court have been assailed in CR No.3257 of 2026.
Learned senior counsel appearing for the pe(cid:30)(cid:30)oners fairly con- cedes that the condi(cid:30)on regarding payment of mesne profits has not been complied with. However, prayer has been made that some reasonable (cid:30)me be granted to deposit the amount, contending that substan(cid:30)al ques(cid:30)ons arise in the appeal and, if possession is delivered in execu(cid:30)on, the appeal itself may be rendered infructuous.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents/decree-holders – caveators submits that while he has no objec(cid:30)on to grant of short indulgence, the amount directed to be deposited should be released to the decree-holders and the appeal be directed to be decided expedi(cid:30)ously.
Having heard learned counsel for the par(cid:30)es and upon considera- (cid:30)on of the peculiar facts of the case, this Court is of the view that while a li(cid:30)g- ant, who has failed to comply with a condi(cid:30)onal stay order cannot claim equity as a ma?er of right, yet the appellate remedy should not be rendered illusory, if compliance can s(cid:30)ll be secured within a fixed (cid:30)me frame. The bal- ance of convenience would, therefore, be served by protec(cid:30)ng possession for a limited period subject to strict adherence to monetary condi(cid:30)ons.
Operative part
Accordingly, both the revisions are disposed of with the following direc(cid:30)ons: (cid:1) The pe(cid:30)(cid:30)oners shall deposit the en(cid:30)re amount of mesne profits pay- able in terms of order dated 12.01.2026. Page No. 3 of 4 Pages CR-3231-2026 CR-3257-2026 (cid:1) FiHy per cent of the total amount due (cid:30)ll date shall be deposited on or before 10.05.2026. Upon such deposit, the same may be released to the respondents/decree-holders subject to furnishing security to the sa(cid:30)sfac(cid:30)on of the trial Court. (cid:1) The remaining fiHy per cent shall be deposited on or before 30.06.2026. The said amount shall be kept in a fixed deposit with a na(cid:30)onalized bank carrying maximum available interest, subject to final outcome of the appeal. (cid:1) The pe(cid:30)(cid:30)oners shall con(cid:30)nue to deposit future mesne profits within fiHeen days of each accrual (cid:30)ll disposal of the appeal. (cid:1) Till 10.05.2026, further proceedings in execu(cid:30)on shall remain stayed. If the first instalment is not deposited within the s(cid:30)pulated period, the Execu(cid:30)ng Court shall be at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law. (cid:1) If the en(cid:30)re amount is deposited in terms of this order by 30.06.2026, further execu(cid:30)on proceedings shall remain stayed (cid:30)ll disposal of the appeal. (cid:1) The learned First Appellate Court shall make every possible endeavour to decide the pending appeal preferably within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of the connected case. April 17, 2026 Nee(cid:30)ka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No (DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE Page No. 4 of 4 Pages
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, both the revisions are disposed of with the following
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — r. 5.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 17 Apr 2026. The bench was DEEPAK 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.