IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No.641 of 2025 Decided on 03rd November 2025 Sukhvinder Singh …Petitioner Versus Iqbal Singh and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Executing Petition pertaining to a decree passed in favour of the respondent herein since the year 2015 is pending execution before the learned Trial Court. 2. By way of this petition, the petitioner has assailed order dated 11.07.2025 and 23.09.2025. 3. Order dated 11.07.2025 which is a self-speaking and a reasoned order, reads as under:- “As per the report of the Tehsildar, no bidder has appeared at the time of auction of the property in question belonging to JD. Apparently, at this stage, the Court has gone through the entire case file which is pending from 2016. From the very initiation, the JD 2 was not present despite of the knowledge of the execution petition filed against him. As such, this Court proceeded to attach his immovable property and the property got attached thereof whereafter the sale warrant was issued on 09.09.2016 and time and again, the steps were taken for the sale of the property which was received back unexecuted and finally, the JD put in appearance before the Court through his Advocate and he undertook to make the payment of the amount. Since, the Court has already issued NBW against him on 03.01.2018, the matter kept pending for the compromise between both the parties and the JD undertook to make the payment on various dates since 07.06.2018, 23.06.2018, 25.06.2018 and a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- was paid by him through cheque and again matter was listed for 09.07.2018, 20.07.2018, 27.07.2018, 17.08.2018, 21.08.2018, 31.08.2018, 19.09.2018, 01.10.2018, 09.10.2018, 22.10.2018, 01.11.2018, 26.11.2018, 07.12.2018, 20.02.2019, 04.04.2019, 16.05.2019 and thereafter, for 26.11.2021, 10.01.2022, 08.04.2022, 05.05.2022, 30.05.2022, 27.06.2022, 16.07.2022, 13.08.2022, 28.09.2022, 21.01.2023, 06.03.2023, 27.03.2023, 20.04.2023, 13.07.2023, 22.08.2023, 21.10.2023, 10.01.2024 and till date, the JD is in arrears of the payment of more than Rs.20,00,000/-(rupees twenty läkhs). However, since the property which was duly attached earlier in the year 2018 which could not be sold in the year 2018- 3 2019 itself was also again put up for sale in the year 2025, but again the report received back unexecuted on account of non-presence of any bidder. Since further delaying the matter would delivery system and the JD is well aware of his liability and does not have made any efforts during this period to make the payment of Rs.20,00,000/-, the Court is hereby constrained to issue warrant of arrest against him on taking steps within 5 days returnable for 07.08.2025. It is made clear at this stage the the Court is not hereby issuing any show cause notice to him as required under Order 21 Rule 37 of CPC on account of delay caused by JD in getting the decree executed and appearing though his counsel and well aware of it.” 4. Similarly, order dated 23.09.2025 under challenge reads as under:- “Warrant of arrest not back. Record perused carefully. Property of JD is already under attachment, however, no one turned up to bid in the public auction as per the report of the Revenue Agency. Let property under attachment be sold by way of public auction in the following manner: Date of proclamation on or before: 28.10.2025. Sale be conducted on: 29.11.2025. Report be called for: 06.12.2025. DH is at liberty to take bid in the public auction.” 4 5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the orders under challenge as well as the other orders appended with the petition, this Court is of the considered view that there is no occasion for this Court to interfere with the orders under challenge under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as per se there is no perversity in the said orders. It is evident from the documents on record that the petitioner has been evading the satisfaction of the decree for almost a decade and learned Executing Court in its order dated 11.07.2025 has dealt with all aspects of the matter in detail including the fact that the matter was compromised between the parties. Further, it is evident from the record that on many occasions, the learned Executing Court ordered the sale of the property of the Judgment Debtor to satisfy the decree, but the matter was kept pending to enable the parties to enter into a compromise which never fructified. The warrant of arrest issued by the Court against the petitioner is not being executed for reasons best known to the authorities despite the fact that the warrant of arrest was issued on 11.07.2025 and in terms of order dated 07.08.2025, 27.08.2025 and 23.09.2025, the same 5 was not received back after execution, whereas, the petitioner has been able to approach this Court under Article 227 for the quashing of the impugned orders. 6. All this demonstrates that not only is the petitioner evading the satisfaction of the decree, but he is also successfully also evading the warrant of arrest issued against him. 7. Therefore, in the light of the above observations, as this Court sees no occasion to grant any relief to the petitioner, as prayed for by interfering with the orders under challenge, the petition is dismissed in limini. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge November 03, 2025 (Vinod)