Rao TALIB ALI KHAN vs Peer SALEEM-UD-DIN O — 2023 CLC 756 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Rao TALIB ALI KHAN VS Peer SALEEM-UD-DIN O.XXI, R.53---Execution proceedings---Money decree, attachment of---Auction, fairness of---Respondent filed execution petition but withdrew the same on account of settlement with the petitioner---Respondent filed second execution petition alleging non-performance of conditions of settlement---Decree was attached; properties were ordered to be sold by auction---Respondent was declared as higher bidder---Objection petition and an application under S.12(2) of the C.P.C. were filed against the attachment order which were concurrently dismissed---Petitioner contended that settlement was fulfilled and properties (agricultural land and residential house) committed therein were transferred; that execution could not proceed in wake of implementation of settlement; that not only the money decree dated 28/03/1998 was satisfied but another decree dated 23/06/1993 was also satisfied; that requirements of O.XXI, R.53 of the C.P.C., were not fulfilled; that attached decree was not saleable through auction; that subject property of attached decree was sold at throw away price---Failure of the petitioner to transfer/alienate 81-Kanal and 16-Marlas of land tantamount to failure to fulfil conditions of settlement qua the money decree of Rs.21,09,000/-, which entitled the respondent to seek resurrection and enforcement of the money decree, hence the money decree was executable---All requirements of attachment of a non-money decree were fulfilled---Money decree could not be sold in execution, however, once such decree was attached the procedure provided under sub-rule (2) of R.53, O.XXI of the C.P.C. had to be followed---Fixed reserve price showed absence of conscious effort, causing prejudice to the petitioner---Conduct of auction at much discounted price coupled with the fact that respondent himself participated in the bidding process and claimed set-off defied fairness/manifested arbitrary exercise/overlooking legal requirements for determining reserve price of the attached decree---Attached decree could have fetched more price, adequate to satisfy the money decree in full and leaving some balance to the benefit of the petitioner---Revision petition was partly allowed.

Rao TALIB ALI KHAN vs Peer SALEEM-UD-DIN O — 2023 CLC 756 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 CLC