Wife Of Judgment-Debtor Not Stranger To Decree, Can't Invoke Order XXI Rule 99 CPC: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that Order XXI Rule 99 of CPC cannot be invoked by a Judgment-Debtor, including their spouse, since it is only meant to enable a 'stranger' to the suit to seek relief.The provision stipulates that where any person, other than the judgment-debtor, is dispossessed of immovable property by the holder of a decree for possession of such property, he may make...
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that Order XXI Rule 99 of CPC cannot be invoked by a Judgment-Debtor, including their spouse, since it is only meant to enable a 'stranger' to the suit to seek relief.
The provision stipulates that where any person, other than the judgment-debtor, is dispossessed of immovable property by the holder of a decree for possession of such property, he may make an application to the Court complaining of such dispossession.
“Order XXI Rule 99 CPC is meant for a third party i.e. stranger to a decree. A judgment-debtor cannot make use of the aforesaid provision,” Justice Manoj Jain thus held.
The bench was dealing with a plea filed by the wife of a judgment-debtor challenging the summary dismissal of her petition filed under Order XXI Rule 99 CPC.
The decree holder had claimed absolute and sole ownership of the property in question. The suit was decreed after the judgment-debtor failed to defend the matter despite the grant of numerous opportunities.
The application under Order XXI Rule 99 CPC was filed by the wife of judgment-debtor in his pending appeal, with the assertion that the impugned decree was obtained by way of fraud. According to her, the decree-holder runs a gang of land grabbers and has trapped several persons.
Aggrieved by its dismissal, she moved the High Court.
The decree-holder contended that objection by a third party can only be filed after getting dispossessed. Moreover, the objection in hand is at the behest of judgment-debtor only and not from any third party.
The Court observed that the wife was only a face in the front and the “strings are pulled” by her husband, the judgment-debtor.
“When asked, learned counsel for petitioner, in all fairness, submitted that there is no matrimonial discord between petitioner and her husband. Manifestly, the objection application is, for all purposes, at the behest of her husband only…such objector cannot be permitted to raise grievance that it has independent right to maintain the same, being third party,” the Court observed.
Appearance: Mr. Krishna Chandra Dubey, Mr. Ashok Kr. Singh, Mr. Abhishek Agarwal and Ms. Uma Tarafdar, Advocates for Petitioner; Mr. Akil Rataeeya and Mr. Movish Lohia, Advocates for Respondent
Case title: Leelawati v. Rajeev Kumar
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1066
Case no.: CM(M) 1274/2025