LAWS(SC)-2022-2-113

RAJBIR Vs. SURAJ BHAN

Decided On February 28, 2022
RAJBIR Appellant
V/S
SURAJ BHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted. While procedure is said to be the handmaiden of justice and substantial justice must prevail and the former may take the backseat, failure to follow the procedure laid down by law can result in grave miscarriage of justice to the judgment debtor and delay in the decree holder realising the fruits of the decree, all of which will be evident from facts of this case as we narrate them.

(2.) The appellant along with his brother agreed to sell certain property which we shall refer to, to the respondents-Suraj Bhan and Balraj on 28/1/2006. Thereupon, the respondents instituted a suit for specific performance. It was inter alia the case of the respondents that the brother of the appellant (Raj Kumar) had already conveyed his part of the property in conformity with the agreement. The appellant, it would appear, had sold the property to a person who was arrayed as second defendant in the suit. The suit finally came to be decreed. In other words, a decree for specific performance was passed. The terms of the decree may be noticed as follows:

(3.) The appellant was unsuccessful in challenging the aforesaid decree both in first appeal and, what is more, in the second appeal before the High Court. An attempt made before this Court culminated in the rejection of the special leave petition filed by the appellant. The respondents applied for execution. The appellant filed his objections. They are as follows: