PARMINDER SINGH Vs. AVTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DURING the course of arguments, Mr. S. C. Kapoor, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner drew ray attention to order XXI, Rule 1, sub-rule (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure which reads as under :

(2.) MR . Gaur, the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of JD (Avtar Singh), however, has opposed, the payment of the decretal amount to the bank by third party Shri Parminder Singh. He submits that the a learned Single Judge of this Court has already held that the said petitioner has no locus standi to file any objection against the execution of the decree and the SLP filed by him was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. He, therefore, contends that no payment can be made in these proceedings. In support of his contention the learned counsel has placed reliance on two judgments of the Supreme Court in Mohan Lai Goenka v. Benoy Kishna Mukherjee etc. , AIR 1953 S. C. 65 and Devidayal Rolling Mills v. Prakashchiman Lal, 1993 (2)Supreme Court Cases 470.

(3.) COPY of the order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the parties on usual payment. .