IMPORTANT POINT
A money decree against a corporation cannot be executed against its directors or employees unless they are personally liable; the corporate veil protects individuals from personal liability for corporate debts.

JUDGMENT :

Ashutosh Srivastava, J.

1. Heard Sri Pankaj Saksena, learned counsel for the Revisionist and Smt. Rama Goel Bansal, learned counsel for the Plaintiff/Decree Holder/ Opposite Party No.1. The Opposite Party Nos. 2 to 4 have been arrayed as Judgment Debtors/Defendants/Proforma Opposite Parties. No one has put in appearance on their behalf.

2. With the consent of the parties the instant SCC Revision is being decided finally.

3. The instant SCC Revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, 1887 at the instance of the Defendant/Judgment Debtor has been filed questioning the judgment and order dated 16.01.2024 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 6, Bareilly, whereby and whereunder allowing the application 57-Kha of the Plaintiff/Decree Holder/Opposite Party No. 1 in Execution Case No. 02 of 2021 arising out of SCC Suit No. 18 of 2016 and issuing the Warrant of Arrest against the Revisionist.

4. The relief claimed by way of the instant SCC Revision is that the Revision be allowed the judgment and order dated 16.01.2024 in Execution Case No. 2 of 2021 (Dr. Ila Sharma Vs. M/s Benett Coleman & Co. Ltd. and others) be set aside with costs.

5. The facts giving rise to the controversy involved between the parties shorn of unnecessary details are that the Revisionist presently working as Vice President of M/s Benett Coleman & Co. Ltd. while working as General Manager and Branch Head was duly authorized to enter into lease agreement with one Ram Dev Bhaguna for the purposes of rent for the period of 9 years w.e.f. 01.06.2013 to 31.05.2022 @ Rs.15,000/- to be enhanced by 15% after 3 years regarding office space at 129, Civil Lines, Balwant Singh Road, Bareilly, having total area 2000 sq. ft. Though the tenancy was for a fixed period of 9 years but the lessee was entitled to terminate the lease by giving 3 months notice during the tenure of the lease. The tenancy was terminated by the Landlord/Lessor vide Notice dated 22.04.2016 and a request was made to the Company to vacate the premises and handover the vacant possession on expiry of 30 days from the service of notice and claimed mesne profits @ Rs.2500/-per day till delivery of actual physical possession. The Company did not vacate the tenanted premises and the Lessor/Landlord instituted a SCC Suit being SCC Suit No. 18 of 2016 (Dr. Illa Sharma and others Vs. M/s Benett Coleman & Co. Ltd. and others) for ejectment and recovery of mesne profits @ Rs.2500/-per day from the date of filing of the Suit till the date of actual possession.

6. The Company is stated to have filed an Application dated 10.09.2018 (Paper No. 37-C) before the Court stating that it is willing to handover the vacant possession of the premises to the Landlord but the Landlord is not coming forward to accept the same and, accordingly, a request was made that the keys of the premises be accepted by the Court and an Amin Commissioner be appointed to ascertain the vacancy and take custody and hand over possession to the Landlord. It is admitted position that vacant possession of the tenanted premises was handed over to the Opposite Party No.1, Dr. Illa Sharma on 01.10.2019, who issued a Letter of Possession on 01.10.2019.

7. The SCC Suit, thereafter proceeded ex-parte and was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 05.08.2021 under which the Company M/s Benett Coleman & Co. Ltd. was directed to pay the mesne profit @ Rs.2500/- per day from the date of filing of the Suit till the date of delivery of possession i.e. 01.10.2019 totaling to a sum of Rs.30,57,500/-to the Plaintiff/Opposite Party No.1 within one month. The judgment and decree dated 05.08.2021 has been assailed by the Company M/s Benett Coleman & Co. Ltd. in SCC Revision (Defective) No. 36 of 2023, in which this Court has issued notice on the Delay Condonation Application and the Revision is pending consideration. The effect and operation of the judgment and decree dated 05.08.2021 has not been stayed.

8. The Plaintiff/Decree Hol