Patna High Court
Ajay Prasad, AdvocateversusThe Registrar General High Court,
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The petition was dismissed as there was no merit in the contempt claim.
Summary
The petitioner filed a contempt petition alleging that the executing court failed to dispose of Execution Case No.236 of 2023 despite Supreme Court guidelines. The High Court examined a communication from the Civil Judge (Senior Division)-9, Patna, explaining that the delay was due to multiple adjournments sought by the decree-holder and other applications, not laches on the part of the court. The judge found that the reasons for delay were beyond the control of the executing court and that no contempt had occurred. Consequently, the contempt petition was dismissed. The court also directed both parties to cooperate for the prompt disposal of the pending execution case.
Issues considered
- Whether the executing court's delay in disposing Execution Case No.236 of 2023 amounts to contempt of court
- Whether the delay can be attributed to laches on the part of the executing court
Subjects
- contempt of court
- execution of decree
- adjournments
- laches
- Civil Procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1752 of 2025
In
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.688 of 2024
======================================================
Ajay Prasad, Advocate son of late Chamru Lal, resident of Satyanarain
Building, Exhibition Road, P.S. Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001, town and
district- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Registrar General High Court, Patna, namely, Sri Pradeep Kumar Malik.
2. Nitin Kumar Tripathi, I/c. Registrar Civil Court, Patna.
3. M/s. Divya Auto Accessories, represented through Proprietor Sri Umesh
Kumar, Satya Narayan Building, Exhibition Road, P.S.-Gandhi Maidan,
P.O.- G.P.O., District- Patna.
4. Umesh Kumar, proprietor of Divya Auto Accessories, Satya
NarayanBuilding, Exhibition Road, P.S.- Gandhi Maidan, P.O. G.P.O.,
District-Patna.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kaushal Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Vishal Vikram Rana, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 13-02-2026 In compliance of the order dated 16.01.2026, a
communication has been received from the learned Civil Judge
(Senior Division)-9, Patna. In his explanation, for not disposing
of the Execution Case No.236 of 2023 following the guidelines
of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the learned executing court has
submitted in details its reason. I am satisfied with the
explanation that there is no laches on the part of the learned
executing court as the matter could not be disposed of due to the
reasons which are beyond the control of learned executing court
Patna High Court MJC No.1752 of 2025(5) dt.13-02-2026
2/2
as most of the adjournments was sought on behalf of decree-
holder. A number of applications have been filed and the court
proceeded in accordance with law.
2. Therefore, finding no merit in the present contempt
petition, this proceeding is dropped.
3. However, the parties are directed to cooperate
towards disposal of Execution Case No.236 of 2023.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
V.K.Pandey/-
U T
Checking your session…