IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHISH SHROTI th ON THE 5 OF MAY, 2025 MISC. PETITION No. 2072 of 2025 KRISKANT BHARGAVA Versus BHAGWAN SHARAN SHARMA AND OTHERS Appearance:

Mr. Vineet Saxena - Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Prakash Chandra Chandil - Advocate for the respondents.

ORDER This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner, who is judgment debtor before the Executing Court, challenging the order dated 16.04.2025 passed by Principal District Judge, Gwalior in MJC No.136/2025, whereby his application under Section 24 of CPC seeking transfer of execution case from the Court of First District Judge, Dabra, District Gwalior to some other Court, has been rejected. 2. The facts gathered from the record of this case are that the suit for specific performance, filed by the respondents/decree holders, was decreed by this Court vide judgment and decree dated 11.08.2021 passed in First Appeal No.292/2009. Accordingly, decree holders initiated execution proceedings which was subject matter of Execution Case No.12/2021. In the said execution case, the sale-deed was executed in favour of decree holders and, therefore, the Executing Court closed the proceedings vide order dated Signature Not Verified Signed by: BARKHA

16.09.2022. Since the possession of the property was not delivered to the decree holders, they challenged the order dated 16.09.2022 before this Court. This Court vide order dated 02.12.2024 passed in M.P. No.2325/2024 set aside the order and restored the execution proceedings to its original number with direction to the Executing Court to conclude the proceedings as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months. It is also observed in the said order that the judgment debtor is at liberty to raise all plausible objections before the Executing Court, which shall be decided in accordance with law.

3. The decree holders then placed the order of this Court before the Executing Court on 19.12.2024. The Executing Court accordingly, restored the execution case to its original number and fixed the case for 04.02.2025 for appearance of the parties. The order-sheets of the execution case have been filed along with the petition, which shows that on 11.01.2025 Mr. G.K. Chaturvedi - Advocate appeared and filed memo on behalf of judgment debtor and sought time to file Vakalatnama. The case was accordingly fixed for 04.02.2025. The order-sheet of 04.02.2025 shows that Mr. Sohan Lal Sahu - Advocate along with decree holder - Bhagwansharan Sharma appeared. Mr. G.K. Chaturvedi - Advocate appeared on behalf of judgment debtor and filed his Vakalatnama. The order-sheet further shows that the documents were supplied to the decree holders and he was directed to deliver possession of the suit property in compliance of the decree. The decree holders were given liberty to submit Talwana for issuance of the possession warrant. The case was than fixed for 20.02.2025. On 20.02.2025, the order-

Signature Not Verified Signed by: BARKHA sheet shows that the parties to the execution proceedings were represented through their respective counsel. On behalf of judgment debtor, it was stated that he has received the documents on that day itself and he sought time to submit his objection. Time was accordingly, granted and the case was adjourned to 22.03.2025.

4 . The judgment debtor thereafter filed a complaint or or about

19.03.2025 making certain allegations with regard to the procedure adopted by the Presiding Officer of the Execution Court. It is alleged that even though the Presiding Officer was on leave on 04.02.2025, still the order- sheet was written and the possession warrant was issued. On this ground, the judgment debtor says that Presiding Officer was influenced by the decree holders and is proceeding fast in the execution case.

5 . It appears that when the complaint was presented before the Principal District Judge, the matter came to the kno