Harbans Singh v. Gurnam Singh And ORS

C.R. No.3919 of 2016 -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.3919 of 2016 Date of Decision.14.09.2016 Harbans Singh .......Petitioner Vs.

Gurnam Singh and others ........Respondents

Present:

Mr. B.R. Rana-I, Advocate for the petitioner.

-.- AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL) The petitioner-defendant No.1 is aggrieved of the dismissal of application moved under Section 10 CPC for staying of the suit for specific performance of agreement to sell instituted by the vendee against him on the premise that suit for partition of the suit property at the instance of the LRs of Mehar Singh, the vendor, is stated to be pending. I have gone through the aforementioned application and as well as the pleadings in the suit and of the view that in suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell, Mehar Singh has mentioned himself to be owner. If at all, they are able to prove in suit for specific performance that Mehar Singh was having a joint khata or co-sharer, the suit shall be contested as per the documentary and oral evidence but not in the manner and mode as has been done. It is an attempt to delay the adjudication of the suit as the suit for partition is amongst the LRs of Mehar Singh. In my view, it is an attempt to delay the adjudication of the suit for specific performance which is not permissible in law.

I do not find any illegality and perversity in the order under challenge, much less, the order cannot be said to be passed without PANKAJ KUMAR 2016.09.20 12:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

C.R. No.3919 of 2016 -2jurisdiction. No ground for interference is made out. The revision petition is dismissed.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE September 14, 2016 Pankaj* Whether reasoned/speaking Yes Whether reportable No PANKAJ KUMAR 2016.09.20 12:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document