SALEEM AHMAD vs SHRI SUDARSHAN KUMAR JOSHI & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 28th May, 2025 + CM(M) 963/2025 & CM APPL. 31719-31720/2025 SALEEM AHMAD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Advocate. versus SHRI SUDARSHAN KUMAR JOSHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Munish Chhoker and Ms. Jyoti Verma, Advocates for respondent No.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner herein has suffered a decree of possession/rent and mesne profits. 2. Pursuant thereto, an Execution Petition was filed before the learned Trial Court. 3. Possession has already been received by the concerned Decree Holder and now the decree is qua rent/mesne profit. 4. On 04.04.2025, Judgment Debtor appeared before the learned Executing Court in person and Decree Holder requested that warrants of arrest be issued against Judgment Debtor. 5. Learned Trial Court, accordingly, issued show-cause notice to Judgment Debtor as to why he should not be committed to civil imprisonment under Order XXI Rule 37 CPC and fixed up the matter for 15.05.2025. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 963/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:29.05.2025 11:10:18 6. On 15.05.2025, there was no appearance from the side of Judgment Debtor and even notice issued in relation to application moved under Order XXI Rule 37 CPC was received back, unserved. 7. It was in the abovesaid backdrop that learned Trial Court was compelled to issue warrants of arrest against Judgment Debtor. 8. Such order dated 15.05.2025 is under challenge. 9. During course of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner/Judgment Debtor submitted that Judgment Debtor had filed Objection Petition and such Objection Petition has also been dismissed by the learned Executing Court and, consequently, he has already file