LOT RAM Vs. SES RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having regard to the nature of order proposed to be passed by this Court in the instant proceedings, this Court deems it not proper to issue notice to the respondent as it will cause inconvenience to him.

(2.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order, dated 9.7.2018, passed by learned Civil Judge(Junior Division), Manali, District Kullu, H.P., whereby warrant of arrest under Order 21, Rule 38 of the Code of Civil Procedure, has been ordered to be issued against the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the 'JD'), returnable for 20.8.2018, petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant proceedings, praying therein to quash and setaside impugned order, dated 9.7.2018, passed by the learned Court below in Execution Petition No.30 of 2016, titled as Ses Ram v. Lot Ram .

(3.) Having carefully perused the zimni orders Annexure P5 (colly) placed on record, this Court sees no illegality and infirmity in the order dated 9.7.2018, passed by the learned court below, because it is quite apparent from the record that despite service judgment debtor failed to put in appearance before the court below. Record suggest that lastly on 8.3.2018, learned counsel namely, Sh. Pawan Thakur, Advocate appeared on behalf of the Judgment debtor and sought time for furnishing details of property of the judgment debtor, accordingly, matter was adjourned for 20.4.2018, whereafter despite repeated opportunities, judgment debtor failed to put in appearance before the court below, as a consequence of which, court proceeded to pass order dated 9.7.2018.