Kartar Singh v. Bijender Kumar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH (134) Date of Decision:-26.05.2026 Kartar Singh ......Petitioner

Versus

Bijender Kumar ......Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL ****

Present:

Mr. Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate, and Ms. Sangeeta Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner.

**** AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (Oral) 1.

The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the learned Appellate Court to decide the appeal bearing CA No.214 of 2023, along with the stay application, within a time-bound manner.

2.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the respondent filed a civil suit against the petitioner for recovery of an amount of ₹17,05,000/-. The said suit was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 27.04.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mohindergarh. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioner preferred an appeal along with the stay application before the learned First Appellate Court, which is stated to be pending and is now fixed for 09.09.2026. During the pendency of the appeal, the respondent/Decree Holder filed Execution Petition No.100 of -1-

2024 before the learned Executing Court. That the learned Executing Court issued conditional warrants of arrest against the petitioner/Judgment Debtor. Hence, the present petition.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Executing Court has erroneously issued conditional warrants of arrest against the petitioner/Judgment Debtor. He further submits that in case the execution proceedings are carried forward, the very purpose of filing the appeal, which is pending before the learned First Appellate Court, would be rendered infructuous. He further contends that the petitioner is a poor person and despite the appeal against the judgment and decree being pending consideration, the learned Executing Court has proceeded to issue conditional warrants of arrest, which would cause grave hardship and prejudice to the petitioner.

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and have perused the paper book.

5.

In view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to the respondent is dispensed with, as the same would only delay the proceedings and entail unnecessary expense. 6.

Considering the averments made in the present petition and keeping in view the fact that the appeal against the judgment and decree is pending adjudication before the learned First Appellate Court, the present revision petition is disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. The learned First Appellate Court is directed to consider and decide the appeal as well as the stay application filed by the petitioner expeditiously. Till the decision of the stay application by the learned First -2-

Appellate Court, further proceedings before the learned Executing Court shall remain stayed.

7.

The Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the learned Executing Court as well as the learned First Appellate Court, Narnaul, for immediate compliance.

8.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE 26.05.2026 Shubham Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No -3-