KAVITA AGARWAL vs AVNEET SONI

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 08.09.2025 Judgment pronounced on: 16.09.2025 + EFA(OS) 16/2018 KAVITA AGARWAL ....Appellants Through: Mr. Abhishek Agarwal Advocate. versus AVNEET SONI .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR JUDGMENT ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. 1. Through the present Appeal, the Appellant [Judgment Debtor before the learned Single Judge] assails the correctness of order passed on 10.08.2018 [hereinafter referred to as „Impugned Order‟], wherein the learned Single Judge, while adjudicating an Execution Petition arising from an Ex Parte Arbitral Award [hereafter referred to as „Award‟], attached the Appellant‟s rights under two Agreements to Sell, both dated 11.03.2018 [hereinafter referred to as „said agreements‟] relating to the second and third floor along with the terrace rights of the property being K-15, Hauz Khas Enclave, New Delhi [hereinafter referred as the „suit property‟], while exercising powers under Section 60 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Signature Not Verified EFA(OS) 16/2018 Page 1 of 9 Signed By:JAI NARAYAN Signing Date:16.09.2025 15:45:22 [hereinafter referred to as „CPC‟], The operative part of the Impugned Order reads as under: “9. I am in full agreement with the view taken by the Allahabad High Court (In. Bhairon Prasad Chaurasiya vs. Smt Tara Devi AIR 1980 All 36) and, therefore, hold that the rights possessed by the Judgment Debtor under the Agreement(s) to Sell, being assignable at her own volition, are liable to attachment in terms of Section 60(1) of the CPC.” FACTUAL MATRIX 2. In order to comprehend the issues involved in the present case, the relevant facts in brief are required to be noticed. 3. A perusal of