JUDGMENT :

Virinder Aggarwal, J. (Oral)

An Ex-parte Award was passed against the petitioners for a sum of Rs.12,91,733/- along with interest and respondent Award holder filed an Execution Petition before the Executing Court and during the pendency of Execution Petition, notice was issued to the petitioners. The petitioners appeared through Sh. Amit Luthra, Advocate on 27.05.2025 and the Execution Petition was adjourned for filing objections for 31.05.2025 and on that date the petitioners-JDs failed to appear and petition was adjourned to 08.07.2025 for awaiting the presence of JDs and on that date list of property of JDs was called for 15.07.2025 from Award holder. On 15.07.2025 first impugned order was passed by the learned Executing Court whereby the application moved by decree holder for issuance of arrest warrants of petitioner Sandeep Jain was allowed and conditional warrants of arrest of JD were issued for 24.07.2025. JD appeared and filed an application for recalling the arrest warrants by supplying three bank account numbers of JD company for attachment and realization of the Award amount. That application was declined by the learned Executing Court vide order dated 24.07.2025 which has also been impugned in the present Revision Petition along with order dated 31.07.2025 whereby the arrest warrants has been again issued for 07.08.2025.

2. The present Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioners alleging that the impugned orders suffers from jurisdictional error as the learned Executing Court assumed the jurisdiction in violation of mandatory provisions of law. The proviso of Section 51 of CPC and Order 21 Rule 37 of CPC has been given a go-bye.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and gone through the record carefully.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned orders suffers from jurisdictional error as the same have been passed in violation of mandatory provisions of Section 51 of CPC and Order 21 Rule 37 of CPC. The relevant portion of first impugned order reads as under :-

'2. Heard on the application. Since, the execution application has been filed by the DH for the recovery of Rs.12,91,733/- along with interest and costs on the basis of the Arbitration award passed by the Sole Arbitrator, Smt. Sakshi Sawhney (IAS), Chairperson DIMSEFC-cum-DC, Ludhiana on 22.8.2024 and the JD have not made any payment to the satisfaction of the claim of the DH for which DH is before the Court and DH has not aware of the property of the JD, to which, the JD is not in possession of any property. Hence, in order to satisfy the claim of the DH, this Court is left with no other option, except to pass an order of arrest or detention ofJD. As such, the present application stands allowed and the Judgment debtor Sandeep Jain, Partner, M/s. KRM Tyres, Plot No.5A, EPIP Solan, Himachal Pradesh and also at # 295, New Jawahar Nagar, Opp. Guru Gobind Singh Stadium, Jalandhar is ordered to be summoned through conditional warrants of arrest for 24.07.2025. The application stands disposed of accordingly. ' and the relevant portion of order dated 24.07.2025 reads as under :-

'5. Perusal of the file reveals that Sh. Amit Luthra, Advocate appeared in the court on 27.5.2025 on behalf of JD, however, till date neither he filed any objections nor complied with the decree. Further, on dated 8.7.2025, Ld. Counsel for JD stated at bar that "JD has no money to pay and comply with the decree." On the other hand, DH has not found any property, assets of JD to satisfy the decree passed in his favour and consequently arrest/conditional warrants of JD issued by the court. Now, Ld.counsel for JD moved the present application mentioning three account numbers of JD for realization of execution amount, however, he has not mentioned the total amount lying in the abovesaid accounts showing that the same is enough to satisfy the decree and he openly stated in the court that "Ena accounts vicho kuj recover hunda ta karwalo." On one