IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No.674 of 2023 Decided on 15th September, 2025 Ramesh Singh …Petitioner Versus Shri Babu Ram and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. R.L. Chaudhary, Advocate. For the respondent: None. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:- “That the, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this petition may very kindly be allowed and the impugned order dated 14.02.2020 (Annexure P-3) and order dated 04.10.2023 (Annexure P-4) passed by Learned Senior Civil Judge, Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. in Case No. 16/2016, titled as Babu Ram v/s Gidru, may kindly be quashed and furthermore, direction may kindly be passed to the Learned Trial Court to consider the objections of the petitioner and his family members in the Execution No. 16/2016, in the interest of law and justice.” 2. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the order under challenge, this Court is of the considered view that there is no merit in this petition. 2 3. A perusal of the order passed by the Court dated 04.10.2023 demonstrates that after the execution was filed by the decree holder, opportunities were given by the Court to the judgment debtors to file objections thereto. Yet, despite reasonable opportunities being granted, no objections were filed and accordingly, the right of the judgment debtors to file objections was closed on 05.03.2019. Thereafter, in the execution proceedings, learned Court on 14.02.2020 passed an order to the effect that for the effective implementation of the decree, the structure/houses standing over the suit land were required to be demolished and vacant possession thereof was required to be handed over the decree holders. Learned Executing Court ordered issuance of fresh warrant of possession with directions to demolish any structure standing thereon and to hand over the vacant possession of the suit land to the decree holders. Thereafter, the judgment debtors filed an application under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code with the prayer to recall the warrant of possession and it is in this application that the learned Executing Court has passed order dated 04.10.2023, relevant portion whereof reads as under:- 3 Heard. Record perused. Perusal of the case file shows that the applicants/LRs of JD No.1 have filed the present application for recalling the warrant of possession issued in pursuance to the decree obtained by the DH. On the other hand, this Court finds that the right to file the objections by the JDs has already been closed by the Court vide order dated 05.03.2019. Since, the right of the JDs has already been closed by the Court's order, therefore, now at this stage, the JDs have no right to seek the relief of recalling the warrant of possession which was already issued in the present execution petition. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the view that the present application under Section 151 CPC filed by the LRs of JD No. 1 is not worthy to allow, therefore, the same is hereby dismissed. The application stands disposed of. It, after due completion, be tagged with main case file. Let warrant of possession as per order dated 14.02.2020 be issued against the JDs and report be called for 04.12.2023. Steps, if any, be taken within 7 days.” 4. As already observed hereinabove, this Court is of the considered view that there is no merit in this petition. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in terms of order dated 14.02.2020, the learned Executing Court has passed a decree in the course of the execution of an earlier decree cannot be accepted. It is a matter of record that there is a decree passed by the learned Trial Court in favour of the decree holders, which has attained finality and the suit of the plaintiffs was decreed by holding the plaintiffs entitled for possession of land mentioned as in the decree. 4 5. In light of the fact that certain structures are standing upon the said suit land and as for the effective implementation of the decree, learned Executing Court has issued a warrant of possession to demolish any structure standing thereupon, it cannot be said that this amounts to surpassing the decree. 6. Therefore, as this Court does not find any merit in this petition and the same is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge September 15, 2025 (Vinod)