SULAKHAN SINGH Vs. INDUSLAND BANK LTD. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that vide impugned order dated 17.10.2015 (Annexure P-6) the trial court had issued warrants of arrest against the petitioner and defendant No.2-judgment debtors by invoking the provisions of Order 21 Rule 37 CPC whereas no show cause notice as statutorily contemplated has been issued before issuing the warrant of arrest. The impugned order reads thus:-

(2.) I am in agreement with the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, as per provisions under Order 21 Rule 37 CPC envisage on an application received by the court seeking execution of the money decree, before issuing the warrant of arrest, the trial court was enjoined upon an obligation to issue a show cause notice, in case the judgment debtor does not pay the decretal amount. However, in the instant case, the court has not followed the procedure as envisaged under Order 21 Rule 37 CPC.

(3.) In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment in Didar Singh @ Dara Singh Vs. State Bank of India, 2013 1 CivCC 743 Keeping in view the aforementioned facts, the impugned order is set aside. The trial court is directed to comply with the provisions of Order 21 Rule 37 CPC and decide the application in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.