Rajendra Mishra Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : In person For the State : Ms. Nutan Sahay, AC to AAG-12 For the PMC : Mr. Yashraj Bardhan, Advocate, For Civil Court Patna : Mr. Satyabir Bharti, Advocate ======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶14

4 19-06-2024

¶15

Heard the petitioner in person, Ms. Nutan Sahay, learned AC to AAG-12 for Respondents No. 1 & 5, Mr. Yashraj Bardhan, learned counsel for Respondents No. 2 and 3 and Mr. Satyabir Bharti, learned counsel for Respondent No.4.

¶16

After some argument, the petitioner/decree holder

¶17

restricts his prayer to seeking direction to the learned executing court, where Execution Case No. 08 of 1998/03 of 2016 has been pending, to dispose of the Execution Case in expeditious manner.

¶18

Learned counsel appearing for Respondent

¶19

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1227 of 2017(4) dt.19-06-2024 2/3

¶20

No.4/the Sub Judge- IV Civil Court Patna, submits that wayback in the year 2017, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent No.4, wherein it has been submitted that due to non compliance of the orders of the court by the decreeholder, the petitioner herein, the said execution case was dismissed for default vide order dated 15.03.2002. Thereafter, a Miscellaneous Case No. 02/2011 was filed on 19.01.2011 and Execution Case No. 08 of 1998 was restored. According to the information received, some of the Opposite Parties in Execution Case No. 08 of 1998 have died and the decree cannot be executed against dead persons. Further, the petitioner who is the decree-holder also requested the executing court that since the writ application had been preferred in the matter, it would not be appropriate to proceed further in Execution Case No. 08 of 1998 and order dated 11.07.2017 was passed to the same effect in Execution Case.

¶21

Learned counsel further submits that Execution Case is pending only because the petitioner/decree-holder has not substituted the judgment debtors, who are now dead.

¶22

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submission of petitioner and also considering the antiquity of the execution case, the court

¶23

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1227 of 2017(4) dt.19-06-2024 3/3

¶24

concerned is directed to take steps for disposal of the Execution Case No. 08 of 1998/03 of 2016 pending before it within six months in accordance with law. The parties concerned are directed to extend all co-operation to the learned executing court for early disposal of the case.

¶25

With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of.

¶26

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

¶27

perwez

¶28

U

Rajendra Mishra v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Mishra v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhananjay Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Gaurab Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vineshwar Paswan @ Vinesar Paswan @ Pucha @ Vinay Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Harsbardhan Narayan Vs M/s Barnwal Properties Private Limited and Ors.

Savitri Devi and Anr. Vs Radha Singh and Ors.

Binod Bihari Mandal Vs Mithilesh Kumar Srivastava