The court emphasizes a pragmatic approach over technicalities in procedural matters to ensure that substantial rights of parties are adjudicated, granting a final opportunity to file a response when sufficient time was not provided.

****

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

[1] By way of present revision petition, challenge has been laid to the order dated 14.11.2025 passed by the learned Executing court–cum-Additional Civil Judge, (Senior Division), SAS Nagar, Mohali, whereby an opportunity to file reply to the execution application by the petitioner has been treated to be ‘nil’.

[2] In the present case, an execution application came to be preferred at the instance of respondents/decree-holders in terms of the judgment and decree dated 01.05.2015, wherein the petitioner happened to be the respondent. An application came to be filed at the instance of petitioner to the effect that he was not the judgment debtor in the aforementioned judgment and decree, therefore, his name be struck of from the memo of parties of the execution application. However, the said application came to be dismissed by the learned Executing Court on 13.10.2025 and the petitioner was directed to file his response to the execution application. Thereafter, following orders came to be passed by the learned Executing Court:-

“Present: Sh. G.S.Arshi Advocate,

Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

Sh. Kamal Joshi Advocate,

Ld. Counsel for the respondents.

Reply by the respondents has not been filed.

Upon request, let the same be filed on 13.11.2025, subject to last opportunity.

Date of Order: 01.11.2025 (Manpreet Kaur)

ACJ(SD)/SAS Nagar

UID No. PB0403”

“Present: Sh. G.S.Arshi Advocate,

Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

Sh. Kamal Joshi Advocate,

Ld. Counsel for the respondents.

Reply by the respondents has not been filed. Upon request, let the same be filed on 14.11.2025, subject to last opportunity.

Date of Order: 13.11.2025 (Manpreet Kaur)

ACJ(SD)/SAS Nagar

UID No. PB0403”

“Present: Sh. G.S.Arshi Advocate,

Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

Sh. Kamal Joshi Advocate,

Ld. Counsel for the respondents.

Reply by the respondents has not been filed. On the last date of hearing last opportunity was granted to the respondents for filing reply to the main application. But today again no reply has been filed. Appearing respondents have already multiple effective opportunities. No plausible case is made out to adjourned the case for the same purpose. Hence, the reply by the respondents to the main application be treated as 'NIL'.

Now, to come up on 19.11.2025 for evidence of applicant. Summons to applicant witnesses be issued. Dasti summons be given, if requested.

Date of Order: 14.11.2025 (Manpreet Kaur)

ACJ(SD)/SAS Nagar

UID No. PB0403”

[3] I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the paper book. I find substance in the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner.

[4] The short grievance raised on behalf of the petitioner against the impugned order dated 14.11.2025 is that sufficient opportunity was not afforded to him for filing response to the execution application.

[5] On 13.10.2025 the petitioner was directed to file reply to the execution application whereas, soon thereafter, on 14.11.2025 his right to file reply was closed by treating it to be ‘nil’.

[6] At this stage, when further proceedings in the execution application have not gone too far, without going into the discretion exercised by the learned Executing Court; keeping in mind that the substantial rights of the parties are to be adjudicated upon in the execution application by adopting a pragmatic approach rather than going to technical, the petition is allowed. Petitioner herein is afforded one last opportunity to file reply before the learned Executing Court within 15 days from today. The same shall, however, be subject to payment of costs of Rs