Even 1.5 Years in Jail Doesn’t Dilute Section 37 NDPS Rigour: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail in 710 Kg Poppy Husk Case Stay of Conviction Nullifies Disqualification Under Section 8(3) RP Act: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Quo Warranto Against Rahul Gandhi Custodial Interrogation Necessary to Uncover ₹2 Crore MGNREGA Scam: Kerala High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail for Vendors in Corruption Case Order 41 Rule 23 CPC | Trial Court Cannot Decide Title Solely on a Vacated Judgment: Himachal Pradesh High Court Strikes By Bar Associations Cannot Stall Justice: Allahabad High Court Holds Office Bearers Liable for Contempt if Revenue Suits Are Delayed Due to Boycotts To Constitute a Service PE, Services Must Be Furnished Within India Through Employees Present in India: Delhi High Court Medical Negligence | State Liable for Loss of Vision in Botched Cataract Surgeries: Gauhati High Court Awards Compensation Waiver of Right Under Section 50 NDPS is Valid Even Without Panch Signatures: Bombay High Court Agricultural Land Is 'Property' Under Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act, 1937: A.P. High Court Tenant Who Pays Rent After Verifying Landlord’s Will Cannot Dispute His Title Under Section 116 Evidence Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Dismisses Eviction Challenge by HP State Cooperative Bank Clever Drafting Cannot Override Limitation Bar: Gujarat High Court Rejects Suit for Specific Performance Once Divorce by Mutual Consent Is Final, Wife Cannot Pursue Criminal Case for Stridhan Without Reserving Right to Do So: Himachal Pradesh High Court Caste-Based Insults Must Show Intent – Mere Abuse Not Enough for Atrocities Act: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Failure to Inform Detenu of Right to Represent to Detaining Authority Vitiates NSA Detention: Gauhati High Court Awarding Further Interest On Penal Charges Is Contrary To Fundamental Policy Of Indian Arbitration Law: Bombay High Court

Delhi High Court Restores Property Possession in Mandatory Show Cause Notice Under Order XXI Rule 22 CPC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, has underscored the imperative of adhering to procedural mandates in property execution cases. The court restored possession of a property to petitioner Sukhminder Singh, setting a precedent on the importance of issuing a show cause notice under Order XXI Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).

The court highlighted a crucial legal point: “The impugned order dated 29.11.2023 was not warranted in the facts of this case and has been passed in contravention of the mandate of Order XXI Rule 22 CPC.” This observation emphasizes the necessity of following due process, particularly when execution is sought more than two years after a decree is passed.

The case, CM(M) 2108/2023 & CM APPL. 66160/2023, involved a dispute over the possession of land in Ranjeet Nagar, New Delhi. The petitioner challenged the execution order dated 29.11.2023 for non-compliance with the procedural requirement of issuing a show cause notice.

The court observed that the non-issuance of a notice to the decree holder from 21.03.2023 until 29.11.2023 was unexplained and in contravention of the procedural requirements. Consequently, the court directed the restoration of possession to the petitioner, Sukhminder Singh, subject to the condition of paying use and occupation charges of Rs. 50,000/- per month from 01.12.2023.

Additionally, the court restored and consolidated the previous execution petition No. 921/2017 with the current execution petition No. 225/2023, allowing the petitioner to argue his objections.

This judgment sets a vital legal precedent in execution cases, particularly in property matters. It reaffirms the court’s commitment to ensuring that due process is followed, safeguarding the rights of all parties involved.

The parties have been directed to explore mediation at the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. The court has also mandated that the digitally signed copy of this order shall be treated as a certified copy, streamlining the process for ensuring compliance.

Date of decision: 19.12.2023

SUKHMINDER SINGH VS LEKH RAM (DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRS & ORS

 

Latest Legal News