Laljit Singh @ Laljeet Singh And Anr. vs. Shamsher Kaur @ Shamsher Kaur Dhillon And Anr.

Facts

The petitioners, claiming to be third-party objectors, are assailing an order of the First Appellate Court that dismissed their application for stay of a judgment and decree. The original suit was filed by Smt. Shamsher Kaur (decree-holder) for possession of property. A compromise decree was passed on 28.03.2019, with the defendant agreeing to hand over possession by 31.03.2021. After objections by the judgment debtor were dismissed, the petitioners filed an objection petition, asserting that the judgment debtor, with the decree-holder's consent, had donated a shop to them. An earlier order of the Executing Court was set aside. Subsequently, the petitioners' objection petition was dismissed, leading to an appeal and an application for injunction, which was also dismissed by the First Appellate Court.

Held

The Court held that no ground was made out to interfere with the order of the First Appellate Court. The reasoning was based on the lack of documentary evidence to support the petitioners' claim of a donation. The Court found it improbable that the judgment debtor, who actively resisted eviction and failed to comply with the court decree for possession, would have donated the property to the petitioners with the decree-holder's consent. Furthermore, the Court noted that the petitioners were using the same GST number as the judgment debtor, which likely raised suspicions about the legitimacy of their claim. Consequently, the revision petition was dismissed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioners have established a valid claim as third-party objectors based on a donation of property from the judgment debtor with the consent of the decree-holder? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners contended that they are third-party objectors. They also argued that there is no documentary evidence to prove the alleged donation of the shop to them by the judgment debtor with the consent of the decree-holder. They further highlighted that it is improbable that the judgment debtor, who contested eviction vigorously and did not surrender possession despite a court decree, would donate the property in December 2019. Additionally, it was brought to the Court's notice that the petitioners are using the same GST number as the judgment debtor. Revenue/State's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (Smt. Shamsher Kaur and another) regarding the petitioners' claim or the GST number issue.