{"id":271363,"date":"2022-08-08T12:00:58","date_gmt":"2022-08-08T06:30:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=271363"},"modified":"2022-08-12T10:06:59","modified_gmt":"2022-08-12T04:36:59","slug":"possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/","title":{"rendered":"Possession of joint land by one co-owner valid in absence of proof showing disagreement between other co-owners; Punjab &#038; Haryana High Court reiterates"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\">\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Punjab and Haryana High Court<\/span>: Manjari Nehru Kaul, J., while dealing with a revision petition for setting aside the order passed by the Civil Judge in Execution Petition held that the petitioner was unable to bring any material that showed that other co-owners were not agreeable to take possession.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">The petition was filed for setting aside the order dated 23-05-2022 whereby objections under Order 47 read with Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001523743\">151<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726944\">Code of Civil Procedure, 1908<\/a> preferred by the petitioners were dismissed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Facts:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">The suit land is in the joint ownership of respondents and other co-owners as per the entries recorded in the ownership column of the <i>jamabandi<\/i> for the year 2012-2013. There has never been any partition of the suit land.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Arguments:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">The counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned order passed by the Civil Judge was a manifest error of law. Further, he contended that since the suit land was jointly owned, the respondents cannot seek possession of land beyond the extent of their respective shares. It was also contended that there was a non-compliance of Order 1 Rule 8 of the Code by the trial Court while passing the decree, where there were a large number of persons involved having common interest in a suit and the respondent did not take permission from Court to act on behalf of others. Hence, the decree cannot be executed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Issues:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">Whether one of the co-owners acting on behalf of others constitute a proceeding that has to follow Order 1 Rule 8 of the Code?<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">Whether an application under Order 47 read with Section 151 can be entertained where the consent of co-owners has been assumed?<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">Whether one owner out of the co-owners seek possession of the entire joint land as an agent of the other co-owners?<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Observations and Analysis:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court relied on <i>India Umbrella Mfg. Co.<\/i> v. <i>Bhagabandei Agarwalla<\/i>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/Ax8o6C3R\">(2004) 3 SCC 178<\/a> and <i>Mohinder Prasad Jain<\/i> v. <i>Manohar Lal Jain<\/i>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/R5ZHek3d\">(2006) 2 SCC 724<\/a> and held that<i> \u201cany one owner out of the co-sharers can seek possession of the entire joint land. Such co-owner would do so on his own behalf, in his own right and as an agent of other co-owners. The consent of the other co-owners would be assumed to have been taken unless it is shown to the contrary that co-owners were not agreeable and despite their disagreement, a suit had still been instituted.\u201d<\/i><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court also noted that the petitioner has failed to bring to the notice any material to substantiate his claim that co-owners were not agreeable to take possession.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court observed that the scope of interference in execution proceedings is very limited and the Court could not go behind the decree.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\">Siriya v. Tulsi Puri, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/f7Jvn28B\">2022 SCC OnLine P&amp;H 1872<\/a>, decided on 21-07-2022<\/span>]<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p>Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\">Mr. Munish Kumar Garg, Advocate, for the Petitioner.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Punjab and Haryana High Court: Manjari Nehru Kaul, J., while dealing with a revision petition for setting aside the order passed by <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":269629,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[8331,35216,2713,30650,50757,2634,3770,2551,7181],"class_list":["post-271363","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-civil-procedure-code","tag-court","tag-decree","tag-execution-proceedings","tag-owners","tag-possession","tag-proof","tag-Punjab_and_Haryana_High_Court","tag-trial-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Possession of joint land by one co-owner valid in absence of proof showing disagreement between other co-owners; Punjab &amp; Haryana High Court reiterates | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Manjari Nehru Kaul, J., while dealing with a revision petition for setting aside the order passed by the Civil Judge in Execution Petition\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Possession of joint land by one co-owner valid in absence of proof showing disagreement between other co-owners; Punjab &amp; Haryana High Court reiterates\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Manjari Nehru Kaul, J., while dealing with a revision petition for setting aside the order passed by the Civil Judge in Execution Petition\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-08-08T06:30:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-08-12T04:36:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/\",\"name\":\"Possession of joint land by one co-owner valid in absence of proof showing disagreement between other co-owners; Punjab & Haryana High Court reiterates | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-08-08T06:30:58+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-08-12T04:36:59+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Manjari Nehru Kaul, J., while dealing with a revision petition for setting aside the order passed by the Civil Judge in Execution Petition\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888,\"caption\":\"Punjab and Haryana High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Possession of joint land by one co-owner valid in absence of proof showing disagreement between other co-owners; Punjab &#038; Haryana High Court reiterates\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Possession of joint land by one co-owner valid in absence of proof showing disagreement between other co-owners; Punjab & Haryana High Court reiterates | SCC Times","description":"Manjari Nehru Kaul, J., while dealing with a revision petition for setting aside the order passed by the Civil Judge in Execution Petition","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Possession of joint land by one co-owner valid in absence of proof showing disagreement between other co-owners; Punjab & Haryana High Court reiterates","og_description":"Manjari Nehru Kaul, J., while dealing with a revision petition for setting aside the order passed by the Civil Judge in Execution Petition","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-08-08T06:30:58+00:00","article_modified_time":"2022-08-12T04:36:59+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/","name":"Possession of joint land by one co-owner valid in absence of proof showing disagreement between other co-owners; Punjab & Haryana High Court reiterates | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg","datePublished":"2022-08-08T06:30:58+00:00","dateModified":"2022-08-12T04:36:59+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Manjari Nehru Kaul, J., while dealing with a revision petition for setting aside the order passed by the Civil Judge in Execution Petition","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg","width":1331,"height":888,"caption":"Punjab and Haryana High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/08\/possession-of-joint-land-by-one-co-owner-valid-in-absence-of-proof-showing-disagreement-between-other-co-owners-punjab-haryana-high-court-reiterates\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Possession of joint land by one co-owner valid in absence of proof showing disagreement between other co-owners; Punjab &#038; Haryana High Court reiterates"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":270781,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/28\/punjab-and-haryana-high-court-co-owners-of-the-joint-property-cannot-prevent-each-other-from-using-the-property-appeal-dismissed\/","url_meta":{"origin":271363,"position":0},"title":"Punjab and Haryana High Court | Co-owners of the joint property cannot prevent each other from using the property; appeal dismissed","author":"Editor","date":"July 28, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Punjab and Haryana High Court: Alka Sarin, J., while dismissing the appeal preferred by the plaintiff against the judgments passed by the trial court and the appellate court held that when a suit land is not partitioned and the parties to the suit are the co-sharers and co-owners,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Punjab and Haryana High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":271413,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/09\/punjab-and-haryana-high-court-order-refusing-appointment-of-local-commissioner-under-order-xxvi-rule-9-of-cpc-1908-does-not-affect-rights-of-parties-no-revision-available\/","url_meta":{"origin":271363,"position":1},"title":"Punjab and Haryana High Court | Order refusing appointment of Local Commissioner under Order XXVI Rule 9 of CPC, 1908 does not affect rights of parties; No revision available","author":"Editor","date":"August 9, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Punjab and Haryana High Court: Alka Sarin, J., dismissed the revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution to set aside the order passed by the Additional Civil Judge vide which the application for appointment was dismissed on the ground that the order refusing appointment does not decide any\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Punjab and Haryana High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/punjab_and_haryana_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":205100,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/11\/14\/court-not-to-interfere-in-writ-jurisdiction-where-civil-proceedings-are-pending-for-the-same-subject-matter\/","url_meta":{"origin":271363,"position":2},"title":"Court not to interfere in writ jurisdiction where civil proceedings are pending for the same subject matter","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 14, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Punjab and Haryana High Court: A petition was filed before a Single Judge Bench of Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. wherein extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court was invoked. Petitioner had invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of the High Court in order to seek issuance of directions to respondent not to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":216130,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/06\/26\/ph-hc-litigants-to-exercise-due-diligence-in-pursuing-remedy-when-judgment-and-decree-already-assailed-before-lower-appellate-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":271363,"position":3},"title":"P&#038;H HC | Litigants to exercise due diligence in pursuing remedy when judgment and decree already assailed before lower appellate court","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 26, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Punjab and Haryana High Court: Amit Rawal J., dismissed the second appeal petition on the ground that there was no substantial question for determination. The regular second appeal was preferred at the instance of the appellant\/defendant against the decretal suit against the injunction order to her to not to interfere\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":300066,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/26\/executing-court-cannot-dismiss-execution-petition-possession-third-party-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":271363,"position":4},"title":"Executing Court cannot hold execution decree inexecutable, merely because decree-holder lost possession to an encroacher: Supreme Court","author":"Ridhi","date":"August 26, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIf this is allowed to happen, every judgment-debtor who is in possession of the immoveable property till the decree is passed, shall hand over possession to a third party to defeat the decree-holder's right and entitlement to enjoy the fruits of litigation and this may continue indefinitely and no decree\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"dismiss execution petition","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/dismiss-execution-petition.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/dismiss-execution-petition.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/dismiss-execution-petition.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/dismiss-execution-petition.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":348551,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/22\/punjab-and-haryana-hc-warns-against-intemperate-remarks-contemptuous-language\/","url_meta":{"origin":271363,"position":5},"title":"\u2018No justifiable cause for levelling scandalous and contemptuous allegations\u2019; Punjab and Haryana HC warns against intemperate remarks, contemptuous language","author":"Editor","date":"May 22, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cNot only has the petitioner failed to indicate how he has been victimized in the matter at hand, he has also made scandalous remarks concerning the integrity of the justice dispensation mechanism.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Punjab and Haryana High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Punjab-and-Haryana-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Punjab-and-Haryana-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Punjab-and-Haryana-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Punjab-and-Haryana-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271363","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=271363"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271363\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/269629"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=271363"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=271363"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=271363"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}