Bahadur Singh Gill v. Manoj Guleria And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 18.11.2025 Bahadur Singh Gill

...Petitioner

Versus

Manoj Guleria and Another

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE

 

 
Present :

Mr. Kiratpal Dhaliwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. ****

 

 
 , J. (Oral) 1.

The present revision petition has been filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the impugned order dated 30.10.2025 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-cumMotor Accident Claims Tribunal, SAS Nagar (Mohali), in Execution Petition No. EXE-2360-2019 titled "Manoj Guleria vs. Harpreet Singh and another", whereby the learned Executing Court appointed the SubDivisional Magistrate, SAS Nagar, as Court Auctioneer and directed the sale of the petitioner's residential house/property. 2.

Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.1/decree holder filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, SAS Nagar (Mohali), vide MACT No. 87 dated 17.10.2016, seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by him on account of the rash and negligent driving of the petitioner/driver. The petitioner appeared before the Tribunal and contested the claim, however, he was proceeded against ex parte on 07.07.2017 after due service of notice. The claim of respondent No.1 was allowed vide order

dated 13.04.2018 by the learned Tribunal and respondent No.1/injured was awarded compensation of Rs.85,000/-, jointly and severally, against the petitioner and respondent No.2, along with costs of Rs.1,000/-. Thereafter, respondent No.1/decree holder filed an execution petition seeking execution of the award dated 13.04.2018 for Rs.85,000/-. The petitioner was again proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 22.01.2020 due to his non-appearance. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex parte order dated 22.01.2020, which was dismissed by the learned Executing Court vide order dated 09.09.2024, holding that the petitioner was aware of the proceedings but had deliberately avoided appearance, and warrants of attachment were re-issued in respect of the petitioner's house/property and in pursuance of the impugned order, the petitioner's residential house/property has now been put to sale on 09.12.2025.
 



  

   

  

   

      

  



   

 

    

   !  "  ! 
#$%       &%'( )&

 *

+, 

(     -. / 

 0

* 1  

 /20 3 , 3   4   5"5 !. )4 1      5 (2  4.   5"5 !. )4 1    

      



    

      
%  -6   ! -8-(
#(9 :   

      

      5 ( 2  4.          

      



 -6  .        



 /  



  

   

  

   

,  :



 



   

   

       

 

  

         

   

 .    

   6



 

 

 # ;

 .  

       

 .    

     .  &%'(        5 ( 2  4.   5"5 !. )4 1   

   



      

      



 -6  .

       

  





    



   

    .

  

 
    



 "  2  <.

( (4 "

        5"5 !. )4 1         

  

 . 

 

      !

%  )"4"&:!2-& 5:!=/ =&->"+1
 <?2=- Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No