Skip to content


Sunil Kumar Verma vs.sh Ram Kumar Bhagat & Ors - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtDelhi High Court
Decided On
AppellantSunil Kumar Verma
RespondentSh Ram Kumar Bhagat & Ors
Excerpt:
.....the decree dated 23.12.2014. in terms of the decree, the decree holder was to tender the balance sale consideration to the legal representatives of the judgment debtors and simultaneously the legal heirs of the judgment debtors were to execute the sale deed in favour of the decree holder with respect to shop no.12, csc, pocket d, vasant kunj, new delhi. since the judgment debtors did not comply with the judgment and decree dated 23.12.2014, the present execution petition has been filed.2. notice was issued in the matter. the judgment debtors are represented through counsel. no objections have been filed. this matter had been adjourned from time to time to enable the judgment debtors to execute the sale deed in favour of the decree holder and simultaneously the decree holder was to pay.....
Judgment:

$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + EX.P. 384/2015 SUNIL KUMAR VERMA ..... Decree Holder Through Mr. Ashok Mittal, Advocate versus CORAM: SH RAM KUMAR BHAGAT & ORS Through Mr. Raj Kapoor, Advocate ..... Judgement Debtors HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI ORDER

2110.2016 % E.A.(OS).546/2016(u/s 151 CPC) 1. Decree holder seeks execution of the decree dated 23.12.2014. In terms of the decree, the decree holder was to tender the balance sale consideration to the legal representatives of the judgment debtors and simultaneously the legal heirs of the judgment debtors were to execute the Sale Deed in favour of the decree holder with respect to Shop no.12, CSC, Pocket D, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. Since the judgment debtors did not comply with the judgment and decree dated 23.12.2014, the present execution petition has been filed.

2. Notice was issued in the matter. The judgment debtors are represented through counsel. No objections have been filed. This matter had been adjourned from time to time to enable the judgment debtors to execute the Sale Deed in favour of the decree holder and simultaneously the decree holder was to pay the balance sale consideration. On the last date of hearing, counsel for the judgment debtors made a statement that the judgment debtors will execute the Sale Deed on receipt of the EX.P. 384/2015 Page 1 of 2 balance sale consideration. This Court had made it clear on the last date of hearing and which was agreed that in case the judgment debtors do not execute the Sale Deed on or before the next date of hearing, this Court would appoint an Officer of this Court to execute the Sale Deed in favour of the decree holder on his depositing the balance sale consideration.

3. Counsel for the judgment debtors today submits that an Officer of the Court may be appointed to execute the Sale Deed in favour of the decree holder. Accordingly, I appoint Mr. Surinder Jeet Singh, Assistant Registrar of this Court (Mobile No.9910390962) as a Local Commissioner to execute the Sale Deed in favour of the decree holder. The fee of the Local Commissioner is fixed at Rs.50,000/- to be shared equally between plaintiff(50%) and the judgment debtors(50%). Rs.50,000/- shall be deducted from the balance sale consideration by the decree holder.

4. The parties to appear before the Local Commissioner for finalisation of the Sale Deed. The draft Sale Deed will be prepared and exchanged between the parties. In case the judgment debtors do not co-operate, the Local Commissioner will be free to execute the Sale Deed in favour of the decree holder on receipt of the balance sale consideration in the joint names of all the judgment debtors.

5. The application and execution petition stand disposed of.

6. List for compliance on 23.11.2016. OCTOBER21 2016 pst G.S.SISTANI, J EX.P. 384/2015 Page 2 of 2


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //