High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Gurdev Kaur @ Jeeto vs Baldev Singh And Others on 10 March, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurdev Kaur @ Jeeto vs Baldev Singh And Others on 10 March, 2009
CR No.1364 of 2009                                        1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

                                     CR No.1364 of 2009
                                Date of decision March 10, 2009

Gurdev Kaur @ Jeeto
                                                          .......   Petitioner
                                Versus


Baldev Singh and others
                                                          ........Respondents

CORAM:             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

Present:-          Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate
                   for the petitioner.

                         ****

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?

2. To be referred to the reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the
digest?

K. Kannan, J (oral).

1. The revision is against the order dismissing the

application filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for

restraining the execution of decree purported to have been obtained on

exercise of fraud by the decree holder. The decree lawfully obtained

cannot be taken to be invalid till it is set aside in the process known to law.

There can be no presumption that any decree is obtained by fraud, which

depends on the nature of evidence adduced on the plea of the plaintiff to

show that the decree is vitiated by any of the circumstances setforth in the

plaint.

2. The execution of the decree could be stayed only

if it is also shown that by such execution the plaintiff will be put to immense

loss and hardship and it will have to be established by necessary

averments, of the consequences, if the decree is put in execution. The

plaintiff has not even stated where her petition that she is in possession of
CR No.1364 of 2009 2

the property and that if decree is put in execution, her possession to the

property will be in any way disturbed. The immense loss and hardship that

the petitioner was bound to show before securing any interim order has not

been made before the Court below and dismissal of the petition by the

Court below. Under these circumstances, there is no warrant for interfering

with the order already passed.

3. The Civil revision petition is dismissed.

(K. KANNAN)
JUDGE
March 10, 2009
archana