( 2025:HHC:42052 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 723 of 2025 Date of Decision: 05.12.2025. Lal Chand .....Petitioner Versus Dev Raj & Ors. …..Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate. For the Respondents: Notice not issued. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (Oral) The present petition has been preferred against the impugned order dated 10.10.2025, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Court No. 2, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P., whereby an application for bringing on record the legal representatives of deceased JDs No. 3 and 4 before the Executing Court has been allowed in the pending Execution Petition filed by the present respondents No. 1 and 2/Decree Holders. 2. Heard counsel for the petitioner, perused the impugned order and the documents appended along with the present petition. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? YES 2( 2025:HHC:42052 ) 3. Order 22 CPC in view of Rule 12 contained therein does not apply to execution proceedings. In this respect, it would be appropriate to refer to the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon’ble Apex Court, reported as (1998) 3 SCC 148, titled V. Uthiraptathi vs. Ashrab Ali & Ors., the relevant extract whereof reads as follows::- “Powers of Civil Court : 10.If during, the pendency of a regular execution proceeding filed on the basis of a decree or order of a Civil Court, the decree holder or the judgment debtor dies and his legal representatives are not brought on record within ninety days, can the Civil Court dismiss the execution petition as abated? 11. Order 22 Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure reads as follows: "Order 22 Rule 12: Application of order to execution proceedings: Nothing in proceedings in execution of a decree or order." 12. In other words the normal principle arising in a suit - Before the decree is passed - that the legal representatives are to be brought on record within a particular period and if not, the suit could abate, - is not applicable to cases of death of the decree holder or the judgment debtor in execution proceedings. 13. In Venkatachalam vs. Ramaswami [1932 ILR 55 Mad. 352 = AIR 1932 Mad. 73 (FB)], a Full Bench of the Madras High Court has held that this rule enacts that the penalty of abatement shall not attach to execution proceedings. Mulla's Commentary on CPC (Vol.3) p. 2085 (15th Ed., 1997) refers to a large number of judgments of the High Court: "Rule 12 engrafts an exemption which provides that where a party to an execution proceedings dies during its pendency, provisions as to abatement do not apply. The rule is, therefore, for the benefit of the decree holder, for his heirs need not take steps for substitution under Rule 2 but may apply 3( 2025:HHC:42052 ) immediately or at any time while the proceeding is pending, to carry on the proceeding or they may file a fresh execution application." 14. In our opinion, the above statement of law in Mulla's Commentary on the CPC, correctly represents the legal position relating to the procedure to be adopted by the parties in execution proceedings and as to the powers of the Civil Court. 15. It is clear, therefore, that if after the filing of an execution petition in time, the decree holder dies and his legal representatives do not come on record - or the judgment debtor dies an d his legal representatives are not brought on record, then there is no abatement of the execution petition. If there is no abatement, the position in t he eye of law is that the execution petition remains pending on the file of the execution Court. If it remains pending and if no time limit is prescribed to bring the legal representatives on record in execution proceedings, it is open in case of death of the decree holder, for his legal representative to come on record at any time. The execution application cannot even be dismissed for default behind the back of the decree holder's legal representatives. In case of death of the judgment debtor, the decree holder could file an application to bring the legal representatives of he judgment debtor on record, at any time. Of course, in case of death of judgment-debtor, the Court can fix a reasonable time for the said purpose and if the decree holder does not file an application for the aforesaid purpose, the Court can dismiss the execution petition for default. But in any event the execution petition cannot be dismissed as abated. Alternatively, it is also open to the decree holder's legal representatives, to file a fresh execution petition in case of death of the decree holder; OR, in case of death of the judgment debtor, the decree holder can file a fresh execution petition impleading the legal representatives of the judgment debtor; such a fresh execution petition, if filed, is, in law, only a continuation of the pending execution petition - the one which was filed in time by the decree holder initially. This is the position under the Code or Civil Procedure.” 4( 2025:HHC:42052 ) 4. In view of aforesaid position of law, I find no merit in the present petition and the same is dismissed accordingly. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 05th December, 2025 (Shamsh Tabrez)