The Shri Guru Ravidass Sabha Southall, Re [2017] EWHC 1255 (Ch) (23 May 2017)

The Shri Guru Ravidass Sabha Southall, Re [2017] EWHC 1255 (Ch) (23 May 2017)

The court must exercise its discretion to order sale of the charged properties to enforce the costs orders, as without sale there is no realistic prospect of payment other than from charity funds, which is inappropriate. No estoppel or indemnity excuses the defendants from liability. All three properties should be sold to avoid unfair burden and hardship on any one defendant, but orders for sale will be postponed for two months to allow opportunity for settlement or payment.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 1255 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Mr Jog Raj Ahir and 21 other members of the Executive Committee of Shri Guru Ravidass Sabha; Defendant: Mr Ramji Dass Chander; Defendant: Mrs Govindra Rani Chander; Defendant: Mr Manohar Khuttan; Defendant: Mr Sarwan Singh (Aka Sarwan Singh Mahay)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim / Post Judgment Enforcement
Outcome
Orders for sale granted, postponed for two months.
Legal Topics
Charging Orders, Order for Sale, Costs Enforcement, Joint and Several Liability, Bankruptcy, Trusts of Land
Civil Procedure Charity Law Property Law Charging Orders Order for Sale Costs Enforcement Joint and Several Liability Bankruptcy +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Jog Raj Ahir and 21 other members of the Executive Committee of Shri Guru Ravidass Sabha

Claimant

Mr Ramji Dass Chander

Defendant

Mrs Govindra Rani Chander

Defendant

Mr Manohar Khuttan

Defendant

Mr Sarwan Singh (Aka Sarwan Singh Mahay)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim / Post Judgment Enforcement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Should orders for sale be made to enforce charging orders against the defendants' properties?
  2. 2 Does any estoppel or indemnity affect the claimants' liability?
  3. 3 How should the court exercise its discretion under s14 and s15 Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996?

Ratio Decidendi

The court must exercise its discretion to order sale of the charged properties to enforce the costs orders, as without sale there is no realistic prospect of payment other than from charity funds, which is inappropriate. No estoppel or indemnity excuses the defendants from liability. All three properties should be sold to avoid unfair burden and hardship on any one defendant, but orders for sale will be postponed for two months to allow opportunity for settlement or payment.

Court Disposition

Orders for sale granted, postponed for two months.

Orders

  • Order for sale of 65 Victoria Avenue, Uxbridge (Second Claimant and Mrs Chander), postponed for two months.
  • Order for sale of 61 Derley Road, Southall (Fifth Claimant), postponed for two months.