Rajinder Singh v. Surinder Singh

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND

HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.8184 of 2017 Date of Decision.28.03.2018 Rajinder Singh ......Petitioner Vs Surinder Singh ........Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. JPS Sarao, Advocate for the petitioner.

-.- AMIT RAWAL J.(ORAL) In pursuance of the order dated 12.02.2018, costs of `2500/- has been deposited. Receipt thereof has been shown to the Court and taken on record.

The revision petition is bereft of the particulars as from the order it is evident that in criminal proceedings i.e. CRR No.3142 of 2014 reached upto this Court in respect of complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, compromise had been arrived at between the parties, yet the decree holder is seeking execution of the decree as separate suit for recovery of the same amount had been sought. Once the compromise has been arrived at between the parties, the execution petition was required to be dismissed and rightly so, had been done. In view of the aforementioned, I do not find any illegality and perversity in the order under challenge, much less, the same cannot be said to be passed without jurisdiction or beyond jurisdiction. The revision petition stands dismissed.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE March 28, 2018 Pankaj* Whether reasoned/speaking Yes PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.04.03 12:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Whether reportable No