RSA-1124- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 236 Sanjay Gera Rahul Kakkar CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. concurrent whereby the suit for possession by way of specific performance of Agreement to Sell dated 27.02.2009 filed by the respondent decreed. 2. submits that vide impugned judgment and decree dated 23.09.2021, the learned 1st an application under Order XLI Rule by the defendant wa could not have been disposed of by the learned without first adjudicating upon the said application. To do so, conflict with 4492-2013], decided on 14.03.2022 -2022 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA Date of Decision: Sanjay Gera Versus Rahul Kakkar CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Atul Goyal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for the respondent. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The appellant-defendant is in concurrent judgments and decrees rendered by both the Courts below whereby the suit for possession by way of specific performance of Agreement to Sell dated 27.02.2009 filed by the respondent At very outset, learned counsel for the that vide impugned judgment and decree dated 23.09.2021, the Appellate Court had dismissed the appeal, despite the fact that an application under Order XLI Rule 27 read with Section 151 CPC by the defendant was pending before it. It is could not have been disposed of by the learned without first adjudicating upon the said application. To do so, conflict with the judgment of this Court in 2013], decided on 14.03.2022, Law finder IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-1124-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 07.07.2025 .… Appellant .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Atul Goyal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for the respondent. defendant is in second appeal against the rendered by both the Courts below whereby the suit for possession by way of specific performance of Agreement to Sell dated 27.02.2009 filed by the respondent-plaintiff, was earned counsel for the appellant-defendant that vide impugned judgment and decree dated 23.09.2021, the Appellate Court had dismissed the appeal, despite the fact that 27 read with Section 151 CPC, filed s pending before it. It is contended that the appeal could not have been disposed of by the learned First Appellate Court without first adjudicating upon the said application. To do so, is in judgment of this Court in Sham Lal vs. Raja Ram [RSA- Law finder doc id # 1975506. rendered by both the Courts below whereby the suit for possession by way of specific performance of was that vide impugned judgment and decree dated 23.09.2021, the Appellate Court had dismissed the appeal, despite the fact that , filed the appeal ourt is in RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.10 20:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-1124- 3. dispute the aforesaid legal position. However, learned counsel submits that in pursuance of the judgments and decrees of both the Courts below, the sale deed has been executed in favour of the respondent 01.03.2023 and only possession delivered to the respondent 4. 5. CPC remains undecided (supra) and plethora of other Supreme Court in (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 172446 anr., (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2638733 Ashwani Kumar v. Naurang Lal, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2309354 decide the main appeal 6. noted above, Appellate for deciding the appeal afresh along with the application under Order 41 Rule Appeal is of the year 2017, dispose of the matter expeditiously in a time bound manner, preferably within a period of six months from the date parties before the learned Ist Appellate Court. -2022 (O&M) -2- Learned counsel for the plaintiff dispute the aforesaid legal position. However, learned counsel submits in pursuance of the judgments and decrees of both the Courts below, the sale deed has been executed in favour of the respondent 01.03.2023 and only possession of the delivered to the respondent-plaintiff. Heard. In the present case, the application under Order CPC remains undecided. As per the judgment of and plethora of other judgments of this Court and of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jatinder Singh and Anr. (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 172446; Amit Manocha v. J.K. Nanda , (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2638733 Ashwani Kumar v. Naurang Lal, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2309354 it is incumbent upon the lower Appellate decide the said application under Order 41 main appeal. As such, keeping in view the undisputed legal position as noted above, I deem it appropriate to remand for deciding the appeal afresh along with the application under Rule 27 CPC. As the Civil Suit is of the year 2011, and the Appeal is of the year 2017, the learned Ist Appellate Court is requested to dispose of the matter expeditiously in a time bound manner, preferably within a period of six months from the date parties before the learned Ist Appellate Court. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent is unable to dispute the aforesaid legal position. However, learned counsel submits in pursuance of the judgments and decrees of both the Courts below, the sale deed has been executed in favour of the respondent-plaintiff on of the suit property remains to be the present case, the application under Order 41, Rule 27 per the judgment of this Court in Sham Lal of this Court and of the Hon’ble and Anr. v. Mehar Singh and Ors., Amit Manocha v. J.K. Nanda and , (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2638733; and Ashwani Kumar v. Naurang Lal, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder is incumbent upon the lower Appellate Court to 41 Rule 27 CPC along with the keeping in view the undisputed legal position as remand the case back to the ld. 1st for deciding the appeal afresh along with the application under Civil Suit is of the year 2011, and the the learned Ist Appellate Court is requested to dispose of the matter expeditiously in a time bound manner, preferably within a period of six months from the date of first appearance of the parties before the learned Ist Appellate Court. is unable to dispute the aforesaid legal position. However, learned counsel submits in pursuance of the judgments and decrees of both the Courts below, plaintiff on of this Court and of the Hon’ble , and and Ashwani Kumar v. Naurang Lal, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder to CPC along with the keeping in view the undisputed legal position as 1st for deciding the appeal afresh along with the application under Civil Suit is of the year 2011, and the the learned Ist Appellate Court is requested to dispose of the matter expeditiously in a time bound manner, preferably of first appearance of the RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.10 20:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-1124- 7. the learned Ist Appellate Court on 8. 9. 07.07.2025 rishu -2022 (O&M) -3- Both the parties/their counsel the learned Ist Appellate Court on 8.8.2025. Disposed of, accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, shall 07.07.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable /their counsel are directed to appear before 8.2025. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No are directed to appear before RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.10 20:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.