LAWS(RAJ)-2024-4-240

SUBHASH CHANDRA Vs. ARUN KUMAR

Decided On April 24, 2024
SUBHASH CHANDRA Appellant
V/S
ARUN KUMAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 90/2017 The present Civil Revision Petition under Sec. 115 of the CPC has been preferred by the petitioner-judgment debtor against the order dtd. 1/4/2017 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh (hereinafter referred to as the learned Appellate Court) in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 24/2016, whereby the learned Appellate Court rejected the appeal. The order dtd. 31/8/2016 passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Hanumangarh (hereinafter referred to as the learned Executing/trial Court), whereby the learned Executing Court rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Sec. 28 of the Specific Relief Act in Civil Misc. Case No. 06/2011.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff-decree holder preferred a suit seeking decree of specific performance of agreement to sale dtd. 25/2/1988. The learned trial Court vide judgment and decree dtd. 7/8/1998 decreed the suit in the following manner:- <IMG>JUDGEMENT_240_LAWS(RAJ)4_2024_1.jpg</IMG>

(3.) On 26/4/2003, the respondent-decree holder preferred an execution petition before the learned Executing Court and the learned Executing Court while issuing notices of the execution petition upon the petitioner permitted to accept challan for depositing the balance consideration as submitted by the respondent-decree holder vide order dtd. 26/9/2008. Thereafter, on 4/8/2011, the present petitioner filed an application under Sec. 28 of the Specific Relief Act stating therein that there is a gross delay in depositing the balance amount of consideration and remaining part of payment has not been paid yet since last 19 years. Further, it is submitted that the readiness and willingness of the respondent-decree holder was not in continuous, as he failed to comply with the directions issued by the learned Executing Court and there was no application for condonation of delay for doing the requisites. Accordingly, the petitioner prayed for rescission of the decree passed by the learned trial Court.