Pearey Lal v. Jamuna Prop.,

$~33 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ EX.P. 185/2002 PEAREY LAL ..... Decree Holder Through : None versus JAMUNA PROP., ..... Judgement Debtor Through : None

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 28.10.2015 It appears that decree holder had failed to give details of assets of the judgment debtor towards the satisfaction of money decree. Time and again, adjournment was prayed for filing necessary application. Consequently, vide order dated 5th February, 2009 proceedings were adjourned sine die with liberty to decree holder to get it revived. Six years have gone by. No such application has been filed nor any step has been taken by the decree holder for providing details. No fruitful purpose would be served to keep the present proceedings pending.

Execution petition is disposed of.

However, liberty is granted to the decree holder to get the proceedings revived, if necessary.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

OCTOBER 28, 2015/rb