The High Court reaffirms that an execution petition stands disposed of as ‘fully satisfied’ where compliance with the judgment is accepted by both petitioner and State; this maintains existing precedent and provides clear guidance for disposal of such matters. Precedent remains binding on subordinate courts in Himachal Pradesh.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | EX.P./2028/2025 of REETA DEVI Vs THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS |
| CNR | HPHC010553232025 |
| Date of Registration | 16-09-2025 |
| Decision Date | 31-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Disposed Off |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA |
| Court | High Court of Himachal Pradesh |
| Precedent Value | Binding Precedent for subordinate courts in Himachal Pradesh |
| Type of Law | Procedural / Civil Execution |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The court held that upon confirmation and submission by both the petitioner’s counsel and the Additional Advocate General that the judgment sought to be executed stands complied with, there remains no issue for further adjudication. Accordingly, the execution petition is to be disposed of as fully satisfied. Pertinent orders presented before the court (such as the consideration order placed on record by the State) further underscore that execution is complete, warranting closure of proceedings. Pending miscellaneous applications arising from the execution petition are also to be disposed of simultaneously. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
The matter appeared before the court as execution proceedings arising from a prior judgment. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the original judgment now stood complied with. The Additional Advocate General submitted a relevant consideration order dated 19.09.2025 to confirm compliance. Thereafter, the court recorded satisfaction and disposed of the petition as fully satisfied. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within the jurisdiction of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh |
| Persuasive For | May guide procedural approach in other High Courts in similar matters |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Emphasizes the necessity of formal submissions (by both parties) regarding compliance before an execution petition can be disposed of as fully satisfied.
- The court explicitly records submission by the petitioner’s counsel and written confirmation from State authorities (such as a consideration order).
- All pending miscellaneous applications linked to such execution petitions will be simultaneously disposed of once the main petition is declared satisfied.
- Reinforces a clean, efficient mechanism for closure of execution petitions upon completion of compliance.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The petitioner’s counsel made an unambiguous submission before the court affirming that the underlying judgment had been complied with.
- The State, through its legal representative (Additional Advocate General), submitted a consideration order dated 19.09.2025, further evidencing compliance.
- On the basis of categorical statements from both sides, the court held that the execution petition had no further purpose and therefore disposed of it as fully satisfied.
- The court also directed that all pending miscellaneous applications pertaining to the execution proceedings be closed.
- The approach followed is procedural, confirming the necessity of both affirmative submissions and official records for disposition of execution petitions.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Submitted that the judgment which was the subject of execution stands complied with.
Respondent (State of Himachal Pradesh)
- Filed a consideration order dated 19.09.2025 to confirm compliance with the judgment.
Factual Background
The execution petition came before the High Court of Himachal Pradesh after a previous judgment required compliance by the State of Himachal Pradesh or other respondents. The petitioner’s counsel notified the court that the judgment in question had been complied with. The State also placed on record a consideration order dated 19.09.2025 confirming this position. The court, satisfied by records and admissions, disposed off the execution petition as fully satisfied, also disposing of any connected miscellaneous applications.
Statutory Analysis
- No specific sections or statutes were expressly analyzed or interpreted in the judgment.
- The order proceeds on the procedural necessity for closing execution proceedings after compliance, consistent with general principles under the Code of Civil Procedure relating to execution of decrees and satisfaction.
Procedural Innovations
The order reiterates the practice of requiring clear submissions from both petitioner and respondent (with supporting orders, where available) to conclusively establish that compliance has taken place before disposing of execution petitions.
Alert Indicators
- Precedent Followed – Reaffirms established procedural law regarding disposal of execution petitions upon compliance.