The Delhi High Court has stayed a Magistrate Court’s order directing the auction of a husband’s purported share in a family property. The order had been issued in execution of maintenance orders previously obtained by the wife, dated 26.04.2017 and 20.08.2020, following the husband’s failure to comply.
The stay was granted after the husband argued that the Magistrate’s order violated Section 60(1)(ccc) of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), which protects an individual’s primary residence from attachment or sale in execution proceedings.
Recognizing that the case involved a “substantial question of law” concerning the scope of this statutory protection, the High Court intervened and halted the auction proceedings.
The husband’s brothers, who joined him as co-petitioners, contended that they are co-owners of the property and that it is their primary residence. They invoked Section 60(1)(ccc), asserting that the property is exempt from execution under this provision.
They further submitted that a prior family settlement had excluded the husband from ownership or possession of the disputed property and claimed the wife was fully aware of this arrangement.
In response, the wife’s counsel challenged the authenticity of the settlement, contending it had already been scrutinized and dismissed by the Magistrate as unreliable. She also argued that the property remained undivided and that the husband had acknowledged having a share during his deposition.
The High Court noted that permitting the sale of a one-fourth share in the property without resolving the dispute over the validity of the settlement deed could result in irreparable harm to the petitioners.
Accordingly, in the interest of fair adjudication, the Court stayed the auction proceedings until the next date of hearing, i.e., August 28.
