PARAS VERMA vs SHANTI — WP227/636/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 04th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010213652026

Filing Number

WP227/12301/2026

Filing Date

26-May-2026

Registration No

WP227/636/2026

Registration Date

02-Jun-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL MATTERS ( 17 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS AND MIXED BAG ONES.. ( 1750 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

04-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PARAS VERMA

    Adv. R.K. Verma,Dilesh Kumar Kurre,Dilesh Kumar Kurre, ,VENU VERMA,Raj Kumar Sahu,Dilesh Kumar Kurre

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SHANTI

  2. 2.Radhiya Bai

  3. 3.Punna Verma @ Annapurna Verma

  4. 4.Smt. Beena Verma

  5. 5.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

    Adv. A.G.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

    Case Summary: WP227/636/2026 Court Decision: The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed Paras Verma's writ petition challenging the execution court's order. The court held that an executing court cannot go beyond the finalized decree dated 20.09.2011 and cannot reopen settled issues, even if a subsequent revenue partition (Fard Batwara) from 2016 appears unequal. The executing court must give effect to the decree as passed without substituting its own judgment, and the petitioner's remedy lies in challenging the revenue order before the appropriate revenue appellate authority, not through execution proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-Jun-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

  4. 26-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP227/636/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP227/636/2026 Court Decision: The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed Paras Verma's writ petition challenging the execution court's order. The court held that an executing court cannot go beyond the finalized decree dated 20.09.2011 and cannot reopen settled issues, even if a subsequent revenue partition (Fard Batwara) from 2016 appears unequal. The executing court must give effect to the decree as passed without substituting its own judgment, and the petitioner's remedy lies in challenging the revenue order before the appropriate revenue appellate authority, not through execution proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case