IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Civil Revision No. 185 of 2025 Date of Decision: 09.12.2025 Surender Kumar .....Petitioner. Versus The Managing Director and Anr. …..Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vishal Bindra, Advocate. For the Respondents: Nemo. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge The present petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 10.07.2025, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Bilaspur, HP in Execution Petition No.3 of 2024, whereby the Executing Court has closed the execution proceedings initiated by the present petitioner/decree holder, on account of the same having been duly satisfied. 2. Heard counsel for the petitioner, perused the impugned order and the documents appended along with the present petition. 3. The petitioner in the case at hand was the plaintiff before the learned trial Court. The suit filed by the plaintiff/petitioner was dismissed. The appeal preferred against the same was allowed and the suit of the plaintiff was decreed. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 4. The decree, in the case at hand, sought to be executed reads as follows:- “It is hereby ordered that the appeal is partly allowed. The defendants are held entitled to forfeit the earnest money amounting to Rs.45,000/- in view of Clauses No.3 and 8 of the tender agreement Ext. DW-1/B. However, the balance amount of Rs.95,500/- could not have been forfeited in view of the conditions of the tender agreement it self. The balance amount shall be refunded to the plaintiff within 6 weeks from the date of the order, failing which it will carry interest @ of 7.5% per annum and as a sequel, shall be refunded to the plaintiff. The parties are left to bear their own costs.” 5. Before the Executing Court, amounts other than those not contained in the decree were being claimed in the execution proceedings. The Executing Court has correctly dismissed the execution on the ground that an Executing Court cannot go beyond the decree. 6. In view of the aforesaid, I see no reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 10.07.2025, therefore, the present petition is dismissed being devoid of merit. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 09th December, 2025 (Gaurav Rawat)