Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

Sets Aside Order for Direct Transfer of Attached Property Ownership- P&H HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Chandigarh, May 29, 2023 - In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided over by Justice Archana Puri, has set aside an order directing the transfer of ownership of an attached property in a decree holder's name. The case (CR-1319 of 2019) involved M/s Bassiarkh Rice Mills and another as the petitioners, and Punjab State Warehousing Corporation and others as respondents.

The dispute arose during the execution proceedings for the recovery of Rs. 44,10,440/- as per a judgment and decree issued on January 21, 2013. The decree holder filed an application seeking the transfer and sale of the attached property in their name, citing a lack of interested buyers. Consequently, the lower court issued a letter to the Tehsildar, directing the transfer of ownership to the decree holder for a sum of Rs. 60,20,000/-.

However, Justice Puri observed that the lower court's process was flawed. The court had bypassed the requirement for the decree holder's participation in the auction proceedings and ordered the direct transfer of ownership, which lacked legal provision. As a result, the High Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the case back to the Executing Court.

The Executing Court has been directed to proceed with the execution from the stage of warrant of sale issuance for the attached property. If no bidders are found in the auction proceedings, the decree holder has been permitted to seek permission to participate in accordance with the law. The Executing Court has been instructed to facilitate the satisfaction of the decree.

Decided on: 29.05.2023

M/s Bassiarkh Rice Mills and another vs Punjab State Warehousing Corporation and others 

s[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/29-may23-Bassiarkh-Rice-Mills-vs-State-P^0H-HC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News