IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 167 CR-5100-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.07.2026 Kamal Kant Jain (Deceased) through his LRs ...Petitioner Versus Surinder Singn (deceased) through LRs and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present:- Mr. Sanjay Kaushal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sudhir Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Nisheeth Bhatt, Advocate and Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate, for the caveator(s). ***** VIKAS SURI, J. (Oral) 1. At the very outset, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not pressing the present petition any further in view of the order dated 07.07.2026 passed by a coordinate Bench, in CM-12777-CII- 2026 in CR-2353-2024, titled as ‘Surinder Hara Foundation and another vs. Kamal Kant Jain (through LRs) and others’, whereby liberty has been granted to the applicant-respondent(s) therein [petitioner(s) herein] to seek their remedies in accordance with law, in case the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court are not complied with. The relevant para of the said order reads as under:- “5. In view of judgment dated 27.10.2017, order dated 10.08.2018 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India as well as order dated 26.05.2026 passed by this Court, it is clearly made out that the intention was to execute judgment dated 27.10.2017 passed by HARISH KUMAR 2026.07.16 19:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CR-5100-2026 (O&M) (2) Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Therefore, the order dated 26.05.2026 does not require any clarification or modification and is unambiguous in its terms. It only states that disbursement of amount deposited by decree-holder be not made between the legal representatives, however, had clarified that the execution of order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court would continue. Accordingly, present application is disposed of with liberty to applicants to seek their remedies in accordance with law in case orders of Hon’ble Supreme Court are not complied with.” 2. The prayer made by learned Senior counsel for the petitioner(s), is not opposed by the other side. 3. In view of the above, the oral prayer made on behalf of the petitioner(s) is accepted. 4. Dismissed as withdrawn. 5. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( VIKAS SURI ) July 15, 2026 JUDGE harish Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No HARISH KUMAR 2026.07.16 19:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment