p SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS WPMS No.2880 of 2025 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Nikhil Singhal, Advocate for the petitioner/decree holder. 2. This writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner for a direction to the Executing Court/Civil Judge (J.D.), Haridwar to expedite the proceedings of the Execution Case No.01 of 2019, Smt. Devki Devi (deceased) and others Vs. Sohan Lal, pending before learned Civil Judge (J.D.) Haridwar and further to decide the said execution case within a stipulated time as fixed by this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner/decree holder submits that the suit out of which the present execution case arose was instituted sometime in the year 1974 by the predecessors of the petitioner/decree holder for possession and declaration of the suit property. The suit was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 28.07.1983. 4. It was contested between the parties upto the Apex Court and finally the decree was affirmed by the Apex Court vide judgment and order dated 28.11.2024. The decree was put to execution in the year 2019. 5. The submission of the counsel for the petitioner/decree holder is that despite the suit having been filed in the year 1974 for one reason and another, petitioner/decree holder is being deprived of reaping the fruits of the litigation which he has ultimately won. 6. He further has drawn attention of this Court to the order sheet which has been annexed with the writ petition 2 and submitted that the judgment debtor is lingering on the proceeding by his sheer absence in the matter; therefore he has prayed for the Execution Case No.01 of 2019, to be decided, expeditiously in a time bound manner. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner/decree holder and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that despite having won from the Apex Court, petitioner/decree holder is being deprived from reaping fruits of the litigation which was launched in the year 1974. 8. The record reveals that various dates have been fixed in the matter for one reason and the other. The petitioner/decree holder has a right of speedy justice, which is a fundamental right. The writ petition deserves to be allowed. 9. Accordingly writ petition stands allowed. 10. Learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Haridwar is directed to expedite the Execution Case No.1 of 2019, Smt. Devki Devi (deceased) and others Vs. Sohan Lal, pending before it and to decide the same within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 10.10.2025 SK