Synopsys

PARGAT SINGH VS HARJIT SINGH & ANR

1. That the present appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the
impugned order of the Additional Civil Judge, Phillaur dated 11.02.2020 and
the subsequent Judgment of the District Judge, Jalandhar dated 29.02.2020
along-with Attachment Order of Civil Judge, Phillaur

2. That the case revolves around a piece of land measuring 4 Kanals and 2
Marlas, originally owned by one Jagmohan Singh (now deceased) which was
bequeathed by the deceased in the name of his wife Harjot Kaur before his
death in 2017. The mutation was registered vide deed dated 25.09.2017

3. That the said property was sold by the owner, Harjot Kaur vide sale deed
dated 03.01.2018 to one Pargat Singh who had paid the entire consideration of
Rs. 6.5 Lakhs against the sale transaction. The possession was handed over to
him after the registration of Mutation.

4. That it came to the knowledge of the now owner Pargat Singh that the said
property was under a dispute w.r.t its title as one Harjit Singh had already filed
an Execution Application in the lower court with regard to an Agreement to
Sell entered into between him and the deceased Jagmohan Singh. The hearing
for the same was pending on 19/9/19.

5. That the contention of disputed title was confirmed through enquiry by

Pargat Singh, who in turn feeling cheated and aggrieved filed 3rd party
objections before the Executing Court at Phillaur.

6. The Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) rejected the objections raised on the
ground that the case has already been heard and decided.

7. That the appellant filed an appeal before the District Judge, Jalandhar
against the order of ACJ, Phillaur. The appeal was also rejected upholding the
order of the ACJ.

Now the present second appeal in this Hon’ble Court.

*Grounds of Appeal *
1. Case of objections should be taken up separately as they are independent
objections and it is mandatory for executing court to adjudicate upon the
objections. Order 21 Rule 98 CPC

2. No opportunity of being heard given to appellant in lower courts.

3. Peaceful possession with the appellant.

4. Even if objections are 3rd party, they carry substantial interest and value
regarding the suit property.

5. Appellant has spent huge amount on land to make it proper and cultivable.

6. No intention of appellant to delay the proceedings by filing objections.