Architects Atelier Pvt, Ltd. through Its Authority,S Signatory Namely Amit Saini Vs Sido Kanhu Murmu University through Its Registrar through Its Registrar — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Architects Atelier Pvt, Ltd. through Its Authority,S Signatory Namely Amit Saini Vs Sido Kanhu Murmu University through Its Registrar through Its Registrar — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the learned Additional District and Judge-III-cum-Commercial Court, Dumka to dispose of Execution Case No. 2 of 2023 as expeditiously as possible, keeping in view the mandate of the Hon'ble Supreme Court (Rahul S. Shah; Periyammal), subject to there being no impediment; I.A. No. 9100 of 2025 allowed; pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether an appropriate writ/order/direction should issue commanding the court of the Additional District & Session Judge-III-cum-Commercial Court, Dumka to dispose of Execution Case No. 2 of 2023 (pending since 08.02.23) expeditiously, in light of the Supreme Court's mandate in Rahul S. Shah (2021) 6 SCC 418 that execution cases be decided within six months. +1 more

Court's answer

There can be no objection to the expeditious disposal of the execution in view of the Supreme Court's three Bench decision in Rahul S. Shah (2021) 6 SCC 418 and its recent judgment in Periyammal (Civil Appeal Nos. 3640-3642 of 2025, decided 06.03.2025), pursuant to which High Courts were directed to ensure their district judiciary decides and disposes of execution petitions within six months without fail, failing which the concerned Presiding Officer would be answerable to the High Court on the administrative side.

Ratio / Principle

The Interlocutory Application (I.A. No. 9100 of 2025) seeking to bring on record the fact that the pending proceeding has been transferred to the Court of the Additional District and Judge-III-cum-Commercial Court, Dumka is allowed.

Key takeaways

The present C.M.P. is disposed of with a direction to the learned Additional District and Judge-III-cum-Commercial Court, Dumka to dispose of Execution Case No. 2 of 2023 as expeditiously as possible, keeping in view the mandate of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to hereinabove, subject to there being no impediment in doing so.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Jharkhand High Court (Division Bench: Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Rajesh Shankar) disposed of C.M.P. No. 413 of 2025, an 'innocuous' petition by Architects Atelier Pvt. Ltd. seeking expeditious disposal of Execution Case No. 2 of 2023 (pending since 08.02.23) before the Additional District & Session Judge-III-cum-Commercial Court, Dumka. Relying on the three Bench decision in Rahul S. Shah v. Jitendra Kumar Gandhi, (2021) 6 SCC 418, and the recent Supreme Court judgment in Periyammal (Dead) through L.Rs. v. V. Rajamani, Civil Appeal Nos. 3640-3642 of 2025 (decided 06.03.2025) — under which High Courts must collect data on execution-petition pendency and administratively direct their district judiciary to decide and dispose of execution petitions within six months, failing which the Presiding Officer is answerable to the High Court — the Court found no objection to expeditious disposal and directed the Dumka Commercial Court to dispose of Execution Case No. 2 of 2023 as expeditiously as possible, subject to no impediment. I.A. No. 9100 of 2025, recording the transfer of the proceeding from Senior Civil Judge-I, Dumka to the Commercial Court, Dumka on 17.05.2025, was allowed.

2025:JHHC:29369-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

C.M.P. No. 413 of 2025

Architects Atelier Pvt. Ltd. Through its authority's signatory namely Amit Saini, Son of S. K. Saini aged about 50 years having its office at SCO-8, Sector 17E, Chandigharh P.O.+ P.S. Sector-17 Dist. Chandigharh Union Terititory … … … Petitioner

Versus

SIDO Kanhu Murmu University through its Registrar having its office at Dumka P.O.+ P.S. & Dist Dumka … … Opposite Party

… … Opposite Party

CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

For the Petitioner: Mr. Shresth Gautam, Advocate Mrs. Saman Ahmad, Advocate For the Opposite Party: Ms. Shobha Gloria Lakra, Advocate

07/Dated: 22.09.2025

I.A. No. 9100 of 2025

Heard.

It is not in dispute that during pendency of the present C.M.P., the proceeding that was pending in the court of learned Senior Civil Judge-I, Dumka has now been transferred to the Court of learned Additional District and Judge-III-cum-Commercial Court, Dumka on 17.05.2025.

Accordingly, this Interlocutory Application seeking to bring on record the said fact is allowed.

C.M.P. No. 413 of 2025

Heard.

A very innocuous prayer has been made in the instant petition for the expeditious disposal of the execution petition as would be evident from Para-1.A of the relief which reads as under:

“A. For the issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/direction(s) commanding court of Sri Rajesh Sinha, Additional District & Session Judge -III- Cum-Commercial

-1 of 3-

2025:JHHC:29369-DB

Court, Dumka to dispose of the Execution Case Number 2 of 2023, pending since 08.02.23 in light of the judgement passed by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Rahul S Shah versus Jitendra Kumar Gandhi and others reported in (2021) 6 SCC 418 para 42 which mandates that an execution case is mandatory to be decided within a period of time specifically within six months.”

There can be no objection to the expeditious disposal of the execution in view of the three Bench decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rahul S. Shah vs. Jitendra Kumar Gandhi and others , (2021) 6 SCC 418 and a recent judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 3640-3642 of 2025 case titled Periyammal (Dead) through L.R.S. & others Vs. V. Rajamani & Anr. Etc. decided on 6^th March, 2025.

In the judgment of Periyammal (supra), Para 73 onwards judgment of Rahul S. Shah (supra) was followed and thereafter all the High Courts across the country have been directed to call for the necessary information from their respective district judiciary as regards pendency of the execution petitions and once the data is collected by each of the High Courts, the High Courts have thereafter been directed to issue an administrative order or circular directing their respective district judiciary to ensure that the execution petitions pending in various Courts shall be decided and disposed of within six months without fail, otherwise the concerned Presiding Officer would be answerable to the High Court on its administrative side.

Accordingly, the present C.M.P. is disposed of with a direction to the learned Additional District and Judge-III-cum-Commercial Court, Dumka to dispose of the Execution Case No. 2 of 2023 as expeditiously

-2 of 3-

2025:JHHC:29369-DB

as possible keeping in view the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred to hereinabove, subject to there being no impediment in doing so.

Pending Interlocutory Application, if any, stands disposed of.

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan, C.J.)

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

22.09.2025

N.A.F.R.

APK/VK.

-3 of 3-