Civil Revision No. 3323 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 3257 of 2011 Date of Decision: 19.5.2011 Gurdev Singh .. Petitioner Vs. Punjab State Civil Supplies Limited & Ors. .. Respondents with Civil Revision No. 3323 of 2011 *** Albel Singh .. Petitioner Vs. Punjab State Civil Supplies Limited & Ors. .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present:- Mr. S.K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioners in both cases. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. By this common order, both the above referred civil revisions are being disposed of. The facts of the case are that a money decree for recovery of Rs.28,29,233/- along with interest @ 1% per month from 1.1.1998 and future interest @ 6% per annum, was passed against the petitioners and one Babu Singh-proforma respondent and they were held jointly and severally liable to make the payment of decreetal amount. During the execution of the aforesaid decree, the Executing Court below issued warrants against the JDs so that they be send to civil imprisonment, vide order dated 22.4.2011. The said order has been impugned by the petitioners in both the revision petitions. Civil Revision No. 3323 of 2011 2 Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that though the decree is still to be satisfied, but the substantial amount has already been recovered by the decree-holder. He has pointed out that from two of the judgment debtors about Rs.7.5 lacs have been attached while from the third judgment debtor his pensionary benefits to the tune of Rs.15 lacs have been with-held. Therefore, in the circumstances the order for sending the JDs to civil imprisonment is harsh in nature. He has further contended that these facts were brought to the notice of the learned Executing Court, but were not considered while issuing warrants of arrest of the petitioners. The perusal of the impugned order reveals that there is no mention as to what the amount is still due to the JDs and upto what extent the recovery has been effected. Instead of straightway issuing the warrants of arrest, the Court below has to resort to some other coercive method in order to procure the presence of the JDs. The learned counsel has given undertaking to appear before the Court below to advance their cause. In view of the discussion above, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted to the learned Executing Court below to pass orders afresh in the execution proceedings, after hearing the petitioners and then to proceed with the case in accordance with law. The petitioners are also directed to appear before the Court below on the next date of hearing fixed after 20.5.2011, failing which the instant petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed. Keeping in view the circumstances mentioned above, this petition is being disposed of without issuing any notice to the opposite party. If respondents are summoned to contest this litigation, they will have to incur huge expenses to defend this case. However, liberty is granted to the respondents that if they feel dissatisfied with this order, they may move an application to recall the same. A copy of this order be placed in CR No. 3323 of 2011. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE May 19, 2011 Jiten