Sarvpreet Kaur v. Sarabjeet Kaur

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 29.05.2026 Dr. Sarvpreet Kaur ..... Petitioner

Versus

Sarabjeet Kaur .......Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:

Mr. Inder Singh Luthra, Advocate for the petitioner (through VC).

Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL) 1.

Prayer in the present petition is for quashing of the impugned order dated 22.04.2026 passed in Execution Application No.EA-51-2024 in CC-441-2022 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, SAS Nagar, Mohali and all its consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

2.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that respondent filed a consumer complaint impleading the petitioner as legal representative of her deceased husband and the said complaint was decided ex parte vide decree dated 22.02.2023. He further contends that the petitioner was never served in the present case. He submits that thereafter, the respondent filed execution application for execution of ex parte order/decree dated 22.02.2023 and it is only on 02.04.2024, the petitioner came to know about the pendency of the execution application. It is further contended that the petitioner appeared in the execution applications and filed her bail/surety bonds and also filed her objections to execution application, which are pending adjudication, however, learned Commission, vide impugned order dated 22.04.2026 cancelled the bail of the petitioner

-2and forfeited her bail/surety bonds to the State and summoned her through non-bailable warrants. He, thus, further submits that the petitioner is ready to appear before learned Commission and abide by all the terms and conditions, if any imposed by this Court.

3.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the record, it is evident that due to non-appearance of the petitioner, bail of the petitioner was cancelled and her bail/surety bonds were forfeited to the State and non-bailable warrants have been issued vide order dated 22.04.2026. The Court without going into the authenticity of the ground taken for the absence of the petitioner, deems it appropriate to direct the petitioner to appear before the Commission concerned and to face the proceedings before it. In these circumstances, when the petitioner is ready to join the proceedings, the order dated 22.04.2026, is set aside, subject to deposit of costs of Rs.25,000/- with the Punjab and Haryana High Court Employees' Welfare Fund, Chandigarh by the petitioner within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6.

The petitioner is directed to appear before the concerned Commission within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order and file an appropriate application alongwith receipt of costs of Rs.25,000/- and the Commission concerend would grant her bail till the disposal of the case on her furnishing fresh bail/surety bonds. The petitioner will have protection from arrest for a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The Commission concerned is free to impose any condition it likes on the petitioner while admitting her to bail. 7.

Needless to say that in case the petitioner fails to comply with

-3the abovesaid direction, this order would be of no avail to her and the order dated 22.04.2026 will come in force and the present petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed.

8.

Petition stands disposed of in abovesaid terms. (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 29.05.2026 JUDGE sharmila Whether Speaking/Reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No