Smt Raj Rani Mehta & Ors vs Ram Lal Sharma & Anr on 16 March, 2026

    0
    53
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Delhi High Court – Orders

    Smt Raj Rani Mehta & Ors vs Ram Lal Sharma & Anr on 16 March, 2026

    Author: Amit Sharma

    Bench: Amit Sharma

                              $~82
                              *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                              +    EX.F.A. 22/2026& CM APPL. 16094-16095/2026
                                        SMT RAJ RANI MEHTA & ORS.                                                       .....Appellants
                                                                      Through:            Ms. Shobhana Takiar, Mr. Kuljeet
                                                                                          Singh & Mr. Prateek Dhir, Advs.
                                                     versus
                                        RAM LAL SHARMA & ANR.                                                           .....Respondents
                                                     Through:
                                        CORAM:
                                        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA
                                                           ORDER
    

    % 16.03.2026

    1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

    SPONSORED

    CM APPL. 16095/2026

    2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of.

    EX.F.A. 22/2026& CM APPL. 16094/2026

    3. The present appeal under Order XXI Rule 58 read with Section 151 of
    the CPC seeks the following prayers:-

    “a) set aside the order dated 17.01.2026 and reject the execution
    application;

    b) Stay all execution proceedings, of the subject property, till
    adjudication of the suit;

    c) Impound the unstamped decree under Section 33 of the
    Stamp Act and direct engrossment on appropriate stamp paper;

    d) Award costs of the appeal/execution to the Appellants;

    e) Pass such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Court may
    deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

    4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that learned District Judge
    erred in not appreciating the judgment given by a Full Bench of this Court in
    Indu Singh & Anr. v. Prem Chaudhary & Ors., 2018 SCC Online Del

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/03/2026 at 22:01:35
    8951, wherein it has been clearly held in the following manner:-

    “25. I therefore answer the reference by holding that order of sale
    which is passed in a partition suit is a final decree and that this final
    decree is a final order of partition under Section 2(15) of the Stamp
    Act with the consequence that such final order/decree of partition
    will have to be stamped as per Article 45 of Schedule I of the Stamp
    Act
    . In proceedings for enforcement of rights under a final decree of
    partition, including of one or more co-sharers seeking possession of
    one or more joint properties; whether wholly or in part; the same will
    be by execution proceedings of the final decree of partition. The
    proceedings and steps for sale of the joint property/properties as
    ordered in terms of order passed under Section 8 of the Partition Act
    will be steps in execution of the final decree and would not be steps
    prior to the passing of the final decree. An order of sale passed under
    Section 8 of the Partition Act is not a preliminary decree but is a final
    decree under Section 2(2) CPC as no further rights are required to be
    adjudicated but the declared rights only have to be enforced
    thereafter and which enforcement would be in execution proceedings
    of the final decree for partition being an order of sale of the joint
    property/properties.”

    5. It is the case of the appellants that the learned District Judge while
    passing the impugned order did not appreciate that the aforesaid ground was
    not taken in the initial objection filed on behalf of the appellant No.1/plaintiff-
    Raj Rani Mehta. It is the case of the appellants that learned District Judge
    while passing the impugned order ignored the specific averment made in the
    application filed on behalf of the appellants under Sections 47 and 151 of the
    CPC to the following effect: –

    “9. That to challenge the judgment and decree of which execution is
    sought, the applicant has taken steps inter alia to file suit for declaring
    judgment and decree which is based on collusion and fraud, as null and
    void.”

    6. On the appellants taking necessary steps, issue notice to the

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/03/2026 at 22:01:35
    respondents, through all permissible modes, returnable for the next date of
    hearing.

    7. Renotify on 17.08.2026.

    8. In the meantime, the impugned order dated 17.01.2026 shall remain
    stayed till the next date of hearing.

    9. Copy of the order be sent to the concerned learned District Judge-08,
    Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, for necessary information and
    compliance.

    10. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court, forthwith.

    AMIT SHARMA, J
    MARCH 16, 2026/nk

    This is a digitally signed order.

    The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
    The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/03/2026 at 22:01:35



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here