The High Court affirmed a party’s right to withdraw a revision petition under Article 227, granting explicit liberty to file objections against an attachment order, and clarified that no opinion on the merits has been expressed. The court’s clear procedural direction preserves parties’ rights for future proceedings and stands as binding authority within its territorial jurisdiction.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CR-5832-2019 Sunita Devi vs. Charanjit Kaur |
| CNR | PHHC011123912019 |
| Date of Registration | 16-09-2019 |
| Decision Date | 30-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED (Withdrawn with liberty to file objections) |
| Judgment Author | MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Precedent Value | Binding within jurisdiction on procedural right to withdraw with liberty |
| Questions of Law | Whether and how a party can withdraw a revision petition with liberty to file objections against an attachment order under Article 227. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The High Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw her revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, expressly granting liberty to file objections regarding the order of attachment of her residential house. The court clarified that it did not express any opinion on the merits of the proposed objections and that all parties would retain the right to raise their respective pleas if objections were filed. This procedural order safeguards the parties’ ability to pursue available remedies without risk of prejudice from withdrawal, unless courts have pronounced on merits. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
The petitioner challenged orders dated 13.08.2019 and 10.05.2018 related to the attachment of her residential house. During the hearing, the petitioner sought to withdraw the revision petition with liberty to file objections against the order of attachment. The court permitted withdrawal and granted liberty as sought, making it clear no opinion was expressed on the merits. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within the territorial jurisdiction of the Punjab and Haryana High Court |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and procedural scenarios before the Supreme Court |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The High Court specifically recognizes and permits withdrawal of a revision petition with liberty to file objections against an impugned order, explicitly protecting procedural rights.
- Such withdrawal, accompanied by a clear court order, does not preclude parties from raising all pleas on merits should objections later be filed.
- The court clarified that it does not express any view on the merits of proposed objections when allowing such procedural withdrawal.
- Lawyers should ensure a clear record of liberty granted to safeguard clients’ future objections or remedies.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The petitioner sought to withdraw the revision petition against attachment orders under Article 227.
- The High Court permitted withdrawal and granted liberty to the petitioner to file objections with respect to the order of attachment.
- The court clearly stated that it does not express any opinion on the merits of the objections, ensuring the parties’ ability to fully contest issues in future proceedings.
- The order aims to prevent procedural estoppel that could arise from simple withdrawal, confirming the preservation of substantive rights unless and until decided on merits.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Requested permission to withdraw the revision petition.
- Sought liberty to file objections regarding the attachment of her residential house.
Respondent
- No arguments recorded in the judgment text.
Factual Background
The petitioner approached the High Court of Punjab and Haryana via a revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking to set aside orders dated 13.08.2019 and 10.05.2018, which pertained to the attachment of her residential house. During proceedings, the petitioner requested withdrawal of the petition with explicit liberty to file objections to the attachment. The court granted the request, making clear it was expressing no opinion on the merits of any future objections.
Statutory Analysis
- The jurisdiction invoked was under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
- No additional statutes or legal provisions were analyzed, interpreted, or discussed in the judgment.
- The court’s order was limited to procedural aspects—withdrawal and liberty to file objections—without statutory interpretation.
Procedural Innovations
- The court explicitly granted liberty to the petitioner to file objections after withdrawal, recording that there is no adjudication on the merits.
- This procedural approach ensures parties’ rights to contest issues afresh without being prejudiced due to withdrawal at the revision stage.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Existing procedural law permitting withdrawal of petitions with liberty is affirmed; the court clarified and preserved procedural rights without adjudicating merits.