IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.692 of 2024 Decided on: 02.04.2025 Prem Singh & others ….Petitioners Versus Sohan Singh & another ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioners: Mr. R.K. Gautam, Senior Advocate with Mr. Jai Ram Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Respondent No.1 is ex-parte. Mr. Shivam Sharma and Ms. Shrishti Negi, Advocates, for respondent No.2. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral) This petition has been filed invoking supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking direction to the Court of learned Civil Judge, Court No.2, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P., to expedite the disposal of case No.9/10 of 2019, titled as Prem Singh & others vs. Sohan Singh & another. 2. The petitioners herein are the holders of a decree of possession of immovable property. The decree has been passed by learned Civil Judge, Paonta Sahib in Civil Suit No.83/1 of 2012 on 25.04.2018. The respondents herein are the judgment debtors. Their appeal also stands dismissed on 29.09.2018. 2 3. The regular second appeal of the judgment debtors also has been dismissed by this Court, vide judgment and decree dated 22.06.2022. 4. The petitioners-decree holders have filed an execution petition for the execution of decree passed in their favour in Civil Suit No.83/1 of 2012 in the month of March 2018. The grievance, with which the petitioners-decree holders have approached this Court, is that even after lapse of six years since the filing of execution petition, the decree has not been executed. It is averred that except for unnecessary and uncalled for adjournments, nothing substantial has happened in the proceedings for execution till date. 5. To support their contention, the petitioners-decree holders have filed copies of zimini orders passed by the executing Court in execution petition No.16/2019. 6. The perusal of zimini orders passed in the execution petition reveals that for some period the executing Court could not pass the orders to execute the decree as this Court was seized of the matter while hearing regular second appeal of the judgment debtors. It was on 18.04.2023 that the factum of decision in regular second appeal of the judgment debtors was brought to the notice of executing Court. 3 7. Noticeably, even thereafter learned executing Court has been adjourning the matter repeatedly without passing any effective orders as required under Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It can further be noticed that since 10.10.2023, the same Presiding Officer had been holding the Court of Civil Judge, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur till 24.02.2025. This reference is made on the basis of the availability of copies of zimini orders passed till 24.02.2025. 8. In view of the circumstances noticed above, this is a fit case to exercise jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as learned executing Court has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it, in accordance with law. 9. Accordingly, the executing Court is directed to dispose of the execution petition No.16/2019, strictly in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. This order be immediately communicated to the learned executing Court. 10. Petition is disposed of as withdrawn along with pending application(s), if any. ( Satyen Vaidya ) Judge April 02, 2025 (vt)