S AMARPAL SINGH Vs. SURINDER SACHDEVA & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The parties to the litigation from which these three matters have come up are related to each other. The summary suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for recovery of Rs. 11,60,000/- had been filed on the original side of this Court, it having been registered as CS (OS) 1188/1985. The suit was preferred by Sardar Sobha Singh Sachdeva, Sardar Trilok Singh Sachdeva and Sardar Amarpal Singh Sachdeva for themselves and as Karta of HUF of Sardar Ajit Singh, joining together as co-plaintiff. Sardar Sobha Singh Sachdeva died during the pendency and stood represented by his legal representatives. On the other side, parties that were shown in the array as defendants included Smt. Surinder Sachdeva, Smt. Kiran Sachdeva, Sardar Gurbir Singh Sachdeva and Sardar Kirpal Singh Sachdeva. The suit was decreed by judgment dated 25.09.1989.

(2.) The decree holders took out execution proceedings (execution case no. 3/2004) sometime in 2001. In the course of the said execution proceedings, objections were filed by two sets of judgments debtors, judgment debtor nos.1 and 3 together on one hand and judgment debtor nos.2 and 4 on the other. The objection petitions were dismissed by the executing court by order dated 23.01.2007 whereby the executing court held the decree holder entitled to a total sum of Rs. 3,62,500/- in terms of the settlement dated 004.1986. The said order dated 23.01.2007 has been challenged by both the said two sets of objectors by appeals EFA 11/2009 being the appeal filed by Judgement Debtor Nos. 1 and 3 and EFA No. 12/2009 by Judgment Debtor Nos. 2 and 4.

(3.) While filing the objections, as aforesaid, in the execution proceedings Judgment Debtor Nos. 1 and 3 had instituted Civil Suit (Suit no. 1895/2002) seeking declaration to the effect that the judgment and decree dated 25.09.1989 had been obtained by fraud and was consequently null and void. In the said civil suit, as also in the objections, reliance was placed on memorandum of family settlement dated 02.04.1986. The copy of the said document has been submitted in these proceedings. Reliance is placed on terms of the settlement indicating the obligation to make the payment contingent upon sale of certain property in New Delhi, South Extension part II, it having been agreed between the parties at that stage that the aforementioned suit (pending at that stage in this Court) would not be pressed and request to be made for the same to be kept pending.