IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 510 of 2002 (M/S) [ Vijandra Prasad ...…………. Petitioner Versus Principal, State Polytechnic & others. ...………… Respondents Mr. A.K. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gopal Narain, Brief Holder for respondents 1 & 2. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 22.05.2002, passed by the District Judge, Uttarkashi, in Execution Case No. 01 of 2001. 3) From the perusal of the impugned order it appears that the judgment debtor is Principal, Government Polytechnic College, Uttarakashi. A recovery of Rs. 50,000/- was to be made from the judgment debtor for which time allowed was one month from the date of decree i.e. 17.02.2001, but actually the payment was made through cheque only on 22.02.2001, which was 2 beyond time. On this, the decree holder initiated the execution proceedings for recovery of Rs. 87,031/-, as the judgment debtor failed to pay Rs. 50,000/-, as per the terms of the decree. The executing court, after hearing the parties, took the view that, though, there had been delay of couple of days in making the payment, but substantial compliance of the decree has been made by the judgment debtor. Accordingly, the executing court struck off the execution with full satisfaction. 4) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Brief Holder for the State (judgment holder and judgment debtor) and after going through the papers on record, this Court is of the view that since substantial compliance of the term of decree under execution has been made by the judgment debtor, as such, there was no illegality on the part of the executing court in striking off the execution in full satisfaction. 5) Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed summarily. No order as to costs. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. August 25, 2009. H. Negi