Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Revision Under Article 227 Not Maintainable Against Order Deciding Execution Objections; Statutory Appeal Is Only Remedy

Case Name: Pardeep Kumar v. Shanti @ Shanti Kalra and Others
Date of Judgment: 11 December 2025
Citation: CR-8357-2025
Bench: Hon’ble Ms. Justice Mandeep Pannu

Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a civil revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging an order of the Executing Court dismissing third-party objections under Order XXI Rules 97 to 101 CPC. The Court held that once such objections are adjudicated on merits, the resulting order amounts to a decree under Rule 103 CPC and is appealable. The supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 cannot be invoked to bypass the statutory appellate remedy.

Summary: The petitioner invoked Article 227 of the Constitution to challenge an order of the Executing Court dismissing third-party objections filed under Order XXI Rules 97 to 101 CPC, contending that the objections had been rejected summarily without proper adjudication as mandated under Rules 99 to 103 CPC. It was argued that this failure justified interference despite the general bar against revisions in such matters.

The High Court, after examining the impugned order, found that the Executing Court had undertaken a detailed adjudication of all objections raised by the petitioner, including issues relating to impleadment, mutation, alleged collusion, validity of the Will, and assertion of independent rights. The Court reiterated that once objections under Order XXI Rules 97 to 101 CPC are adjudicated on merits, the order attains the status of a decree under Rule 103 CPC and is appealable.

Rejecting the petitioner’s attempt to invoke supervisory jurisdiction, the Court held that allegations of improper appreciation of facts or evidence cannot be used to circumvent a statutory appellate remedy. In the absence of perversity, illegality, or jurisdictional error, Article 227 could not be exercised.

Decision: The High Court dismissed the civil revision petition as not maintainable, holding that the petitioner’s proper remedy lay in filing an appeal under Rule 103 CPC. All pending applications were disposed of.