CR-5656-2025 (O IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Jaswinder Singh Bisla Ashok Mehta and another CORAM : HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate and Mr. Yogesh Vashista, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. for the (through video conferencing) LAPITA BANERJI CM-11155-CII This is an application for early hearing of the civil revision. With the consent of the parties, the present application is allowed. The instant Board. Main case Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide impugned order dated July 31, 2025 passed by the Additional District Judge, Gurugram, it has been held civil prison for a period of three decretal amount. It was be deposited warrants could be issued against the petitioner/judgment debtor for committing to 51 of the Civil 2025 (O&M) Sr. No.102 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR Date of Decision : Jaswinder Singh Bisla Versus Ashok Mehta and another HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate and Mr. Yogesh Vashista, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Agastya Sen, Advocate, for the applicants-respondents. (through video conferencing) *** LAPITA BANERJI, J. (Oral) CII-2026 This is an application for early hearing of the civil revision. With the consent of the parties, the present application is The instant civil revision being CR No. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide impugned order dated July 31, 2025 passed by the Additional District Judge, Gurugram, it has been held that the petitioner is liable to civil prison for a period of three months since he had failed decretal amount. It was further directed that the subsistence allowance by the decree holder by August 22, 2025 so that necessary warrants could be issued against the petitioner/judgment debtor for committing to civil imprisonment. It is submitted that provisions of Section ivil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter re IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-5656-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 02.07.2026 …Petitioner …Respondents HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate and This is an application for early hearing of the civil revision. With the consent of the parties, the present application is civil revision being CR No.5656-2025 is taken on Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide impugned order dated July 31, 2025 passed by the Additional District Judge, petitioner is liable to be detained in months since he had failed to pay the further directed that the subsistence allowance to by the decree holder by August 22, 2025 so that necessary warrants could be issued against the petitioner/judgment debtor for civil imprisonment. It is submitted that provisions of Section ode, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the CPC, VANDANA 2026.07.07 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-5656-2025 (O 1908’) are required to be complied with before civil prison. Under the proviso to the said Section, it has been clearly stated that where the decree is for payment of m detention in prison an opportunity of showing cause as to why he should not be prison and the reasons are recorded in writing whereby the Court is satisfied as to the following conditions: “(a) that the judgment or delaying the execution of the decree, (i) is likely to abscond or leave the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court, or (ii) has, after the institution of the suit in which the decree was passed, dishonestly transferred, concealed, or removed any part of his property, or committed any other act of bad faith in relation to his property, or (b) that the judgment decree, the means to pay the amount of the decree or some substantial part thereof and refuses or neglects or has refused or neglected to pay the same, or (c) that the decree is for a sum for which the judgment bound in a fiduciary capacity to account. 2. Therefore, it is submitted was issued to the petitioner and he cause as to why he should not be relegated to civil prison order passed by the learned ADJ 3. Notice of motion was issued for State counsel submits that no written notice to show cause should not be relegated to civil prison was debtor. 4. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 2025 (O&M) are required to be complied with before Under the proviso to the said Section, it has been clearly stated that where the decree is for payment of m in prison shall not be ordered unless the judgment debtor is given an opportunity of showing cause as to why he should not be prison and the reasons are recorded in writing whereby the Court is to the following conditions:- that the judgment-debtor, with the object or effect of obstructing or delaying the execution of the decree,— (i) is likely to abscond or leave the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court, or (ii) has, after the institution of the suit in which the decree was passed, dishonestly transferred, concealed, or removed any part of his property, or committed any other act of bad faith in relation to his property, or (b) that the judgment-debtor has, or has had since the date of the decree, the means to pay the amount of the decree or some substantial part thereof and refuses or neglects or has refused or neglected to pay the same, or (c) that the decree is for a sum for which the judgment bound in a fiduciary capacity to account. Therefore, it is submitted that since no notice in this regard was issued to the petitioner and he had not given an opportunity to why he should not be relegated to civil prison order passed by the learned ADJ deserves to be set aside. Notice of motion was issued for State counsel appearing on behalf of the decree holder submits that no written notice to show cause as should not be relegated to civil prison was given This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. are required to be complied with before relegating the petitioner to Under the proviso to the said Section, it has been clearly stated that where the decree is for payment of money then the execution by shall not be ordered unless the judgment debtor is given an opportunity of showing cause as to why he should not be committed to prison and the reasons are recorded in writing whereby the Court is debtor, with the object or effect of obstructing — (i) is likely to abscond or leave the local limits of the jurisdiction (ii) has, after the institution of the suit in which the decree was passed, dishonestly transferred, concealed, or removed any part of his property, or committed any other act of bad faith in relation or has had since the date of the decree, the means to pay the amount of the decree or some substantial part thereof and refuses or neglects or has refused or neglected to pay (c) that the decree is for a sum for which the judgment-debtor was bound in a fiduciary capacity to account.” that since no notice in this regard not given an opportunity to show why he should not be relegated to civil prison, the impugned be set aside. Notice of motion was issued for November 06, 2025. Learned on behalf of the decree holder-respondent, fairly as to why the judgment debtor given to the petitioner/judgment This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and VANDANA 2026.07.07 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-5656-2025 (O 5. It remains petitioner/judgment debtor to show cause i 51 of the CPC the impugned order dated July 31, 2025. 6. However, this order shall not preclude the l Court from proceeding law. 7. Disposed of. July 02, 2026 Vandana Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable 2025 (O&M) It remains undisputed that no written notice petitioner/judgment debtor to show cause in terms of the proviso CPC, 1908. Therefore, this Court has no option but to set aside the impugned order dated July 31, 2025. However, this order shall not preclude the l from proceeding with the execution proceedings, in accordance with Disposed of. (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE 6 ther speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No undisputed that no written notice was served on the n terms of the proviso to Section herefore, this Court has no option but to set aside However, this order shall not preclude the learned Executing with the execution proceedings, in accordance with (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE VANDANA 2026.07.07 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document