Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 8386

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J
Sushri Madhu Saraf – Appellant
Versus
Anand Saraf – Respondent
WP227 No. 690 of 2025

Advocates:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Sandeep K. Sharma
For the State: Mr. Vedant Shadangi

Timely execution of court decrees is essential to prevent injustice, compelling the court to direct expedient resolution in line with precedent.

Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Execution proceedings - The petitioners sought a direction for expeditious execution of a decree passed in their favor - Past delays in execution highlighted - Court directed the learned Executing Court to conclude execution proceedings expeditiously in light of Supreme Court judgments. (Paras 1, 3)

(B) Relief sought - Timely execution of civil judgments is essential to ensure justice for successful litigants - The court stressed swift resolution in accordance with judicial precedents (Supreme Court decisions referenced). (Paras 2, 3)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, having obtained a favorable decree, noted the lack of progress in execution proceedings and sought a court directive to expedite based on specified Supreme Court judgments.

Findings of Court:
The court acknowledged the delays and mandated prompt proceedings by the Executing Court to honor judicial directives.

Issues: The central issues involved the delay in executing a judgment and the necessity for timely justice in civil proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that delays in execution of decrees compromise justice, necessitating judicial intervention to ensure adherence to timeframes established by higher courts.

Result: Petition disposed of, directing expedited execution proceedings.

Table of Content
1. need for expediting execution (Para 2)
2. judicial direction for swift execution (Para 3)
3. court mandates execution conclusion (Para 4)

Order on Board

24 . 07.2025

1. By way of this petition, the petitioners have sought the following relief(s):-

“10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the learned executing court to decide the Civil Execution case bearing no. 11 of 2024 pending before the learned Second Civil Judge Senior Class Baloda Bazar District Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara (CG) within stipulated period in light of the direction of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Periyammal (Died) through Lrs & Ors Vs. Rajamani & Another etc., Civil Appeal No. 3640-3642 of 2025 and in compliance of the circular dated 03.05.2025 issued by this Hon'ble High Court.

10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as if may deem fit and appropriate.

10.3 Cost of the petition may also be given.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners/plaintiffs would submit that a decree was passed in favour of the petitioners on 30.07.2024 by the learned trial Court. He would further submit that an application for execution was moved before the learned Executing Court on 20.09.2024, but there is no substantial progress. He would pray that a direction may be issued to the learned Executing Court to conclude the proceedings at the earliest in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Rahul S. Shah vs. Jitendra Kumar Gandhi and others , 2021 (6) SCC 418 and Periyammal (Dead) Through Lrs. & Ors. vs. V. Rajamani & Anr.

Etc., 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 293.

3. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by Mr. Sharma, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Executing Court i.e. 2^nd Civil Judge, Senior Division, Baloda Bazar, District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara to make all endeavours to conclude execution proceedings expeditiously, in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Rahul S. Shah (supra) and Periyammal (Dead) (supra).

4. With the aforesaid observation(s), and direction(s), the instant petition is hereby disposed of Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 8386

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPURRakesh Mohan Pandey, JSushri Madhu Saraf – AppellantVersusAnand Saraf – RespondentWP227 No. 690 of 2025

Timely execution of court decrees is essential to prevent injustice, compelling the court to direct expedient resolution in line with precedent.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J
Sushri Madhu Saraf – Appellant
Versus
Anand Saraf – Respondent
WP227 No. 690 of 2025