Allowed¶21

Mohammad Altaf Dar v. Nawaz Ahmad Bhat

J&K HC16 Dec 2025CM(M)/425/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Article 227 Constitution of India; supervisory jurisdiction over execution; arrest and detention in civil prison; Section 51 CPC; Order 21 Rules 11A, 37, 40 CPC; Order 37 summary decree; execution petition File No. 426/Execution; Principal District Judge Budgam; concession by decree-holder's counsel; order set aside; time-bound execution (three months); appearance before Executing Court on 26.12.2025; CM(M) 425/2024; Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul; decision dated 16.12.2025.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; order dated 25.10.2024 set aside on the respondent's concession; Trial Court directed to execute the Order 37 decree per due procedure, preferably within three months of receipt of the order; both parties directed to appear before the Executing Court on 26.12.2025; petition disposed of along with the connected CM.

Mohammad Altaf Dar Vs Nawaz Ahmad Bhat — Writ and Judicial Review | J&K HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 25.10.2024 passed by the Executing Court directing the petitioner's arrest and detention in civil prison was in accordance with Section 51 and Order 21 Rules 11A, 37 and 40 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and whether it unlawfully deprived the petitioner of personal liberty.

¶16

Court's answer

On the concession of learned counsel for the respondent (who raised no objection to the order being set aside and the Trial Court proceeding strictly in accordance with law), the petition is allowed and the order dated 25.10.2024 passed in the execution proceedings is set aside.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The Trial Court is directed to execute the decree passed under Order 37 by following the due procedure under law, and to decide the matter expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months beginning from the date a copy of the order is made available to the Trial Court.

¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of J&K and Ladakh at Srinagar (Vinod Chatterji Koul, J.) — Article 227 petition against an executing court's order dated 25.10.2024 (File No. 426/Execution, Principal District Judge, Budgam) whereby the petitioner/judgment-debtor was arrested and ordered to be lodged in civil prison in execution of a decree dated 21.02.2024 stated to be under Order 37 CPC; the petitioner alleged violation of Section 51 and Order 21 Rules 11A, 37 and 40 CPC and deprivation of personal liberty. Learned counsel for the decree-holder conceded, offering no objection to the order being set aside provided the Trial Court proceeds strictly in accordance with law. On that concession the Court allowed the petition, set aside the order dated 25.10.2024, directed the Trial Court to execute the Order 37 decree following due procedure and to decide the matter preferably within three months of receiving a copy of the order, and directed both parties to appear before the Executing Court on 26.12.2025. Petition disposed of along with the CM.

¶1

S. No. 21 Regular Cause List

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT 0F JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

¶3

CM (7040/2024) in CM(M) 425/2024

¶4

MOHAMMAD ALTAF DAR

¶5

…Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)

¶6

Through: Mr. Sheikh Mushtaq, Advocate

Vs.

NAWAZ AHMAD BHAT

...Respondent(s)

Through: Mr. Zaffar Mehdi, Advocate

¶11

CORAM:

¶12

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL-JUDGE

¶13

ORDER 16.12.2025

¶14

Through the medium of this petition filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India order dated 25.10.2024 passed in the execution petition bearing File No. 426/Execution titled Nawaz Ahmad Bhat vs. Mohammad Altaf Dar pending before the Court of Principal District Judge, Budgam, is sought to be set aside.

¶15

Petitioner is aggrieved of the order impugned on the ground that the said order has been passed in violation of mandate of law viz Section 51 of the Code of Civil Procedure as also Order 21 Rule 11 A, 37 and 40 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and has been passed during the pendency of the execution petition and has directed the arrest of the petitioner and his lodgment in civil prison till further orders.

¶16

According to the petitioner the said order is not in accordance with provisions of law and has deprived the petitioner of his personal liberty.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that he has no objection in case the aforesaid order is set aside and the Trial court is asked to proceed in the matter strictly in accordance with the provisions of law. He submits that decree passed under Order 37 is to be executed and petitioner had

¶18

¶19

CM (7040/2024) in CM(M) 425/2024

¶20

failed to satisfy the decree, therefore, he has filed an application seeking execution.

¶21

In view of the concession given by the learned counsel for the respondent, this petition is allowed and the order dated 25.10.2024 is set aside. The Trial court is directed to execute the decree passed under Order 37 by following the due procedure under law. The decree having been passed on 21.02.2024, therefore, it is expected that the Trial court shall decide it expeditiously preferably within a period of three months which period shall begin from the date a copy of this order is made available to the Trial Court.

¶22

Both the parties shall cause their appearance before the Executing Court

¶23

on 26.12.2025.

¶24

Petition is accordingly disposed of along with the CM.

¶25

( VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL)
JUDGE
Srinagar
16.12.2025.
“Imtiyaz”

¶26

Imtiyaz Ul Gani I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶27

18.12.2025 09:46

Mohammad Altaf Dar v. Nawaz Ahmad Bhat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Altaf Dar v. Nawaz Ahmad Bhat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Ech Emm Photo Colours Pvt. Ltd. Th Narinder Singh and Another Vs Kiran Wazir and Others

Manzoor Ahmad Mir Vs Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. through Its Branch Manager and Others

Mtr. Fatima and Another Vs State of Jk and Others (Revenue Department) through Its Chief Secretary

Usha Wazir and Other Vs Gagan Jain

Mehtab Ali Mir Vs Makhan Din and Others

Riyaz Ahmad Andrabi Vs Mohammad Ashraf Mir

Farooq Ahmad Malik Vs Tawheeda Akhter and Anr.

Mohd Ismail Wani Vs Mrs Masarath Gowasy

Nafees Ahmad Rather and Ors. Vs Yasmeen Ashaie and Ors. (Higher Education Department)

Mtr. Fatima and Another Vs State of Jk and Others (Revenue Department) through Its Chief Secretary

Nisar Ahmad Wani Vs State of Jk and Ors. (Housing and Urban Dev.)

Ali Mohammad Sheikh and Ors. Vs Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (Urban Local Bodies / Municipality)

Suhail Nazir Wani and Anr. Vs Union Territory of J and K through SHO Police Station Ram Munshibagh Srinagar. (Home Department)

Waseem Ahmad Shah Vs Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (Home Department)