Jharkhand High Court
Architects Atelier Pvt. Ltd. Through ... vs Sido Kanhu Murmu University Through Its ... on 22 September, 2025
Author: Rajesh Shankar
Bench: Rajesh Shankar
2025:JHHC:29369-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
C.M.P. No. 413 of 2025
Architects Atelier Pvt. Ltd. Through its authority's signatory namely Amit
Saini, Son of S. K. Saini aged about 50 years having its office at SCO-8,
Sector 17E, Chandigharh P.O.+ P.S. Sector-17 Dist. Chandigharh Union
Terititory ... ... ... Petitioner
Versus
SIDO Kanhu Murmu University through its Registrar having its office at
Dumka P.O.+ P.S. & Dist Dumka ... ... Opposite Party
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
---------
For the Petitioner: Mr. Shresth Gautam, Advocate
Mrs. Saman Ahmad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party: Ms. Shobha Gloria Lakra, Advocate
---------
07/Dated: 22.09.2025
I.A. No. 9100 of 2025
1. Heard.
2. It is not in dispute that during pendency of the present C.M.P., the
proceeding that was pending in the court of learned Senior Civil Judge-I,
Dumka has now been transferred to the Court of learned Additional
District and Judge-III-cum-Commercial Court, Dumka on 17.05.2025.
3. Accordingly, this Interlocutory Application seeking to bring on
record the said fact is allowed.
4. Heard.
5. A very innocuous prayer has been made in the instant petition for
the expeditious disposal of the execution petition as would be evident
from Para-1.A of the relief which reads as under:
"A. For the issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/
order(s)/direction(s) commanding court of Sri Rajesh Sinha,
Additional District & Session Judge -III- Cum-Commercial
-1 of 3-
2025:JHHC:29369-DB
Court, Dumka to dispose of the Execution Case Number 2 of
2023, pending since 08.02.23 in light of the judgement
passed by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of
Rahul S Shah versus Jitendra Kumar Gandhi and others
reported in (2021) 6 SCC 418 para 42 which mandates that
an execution case is mandatory to be decided within a
period of time specifically within six months."
6. There can be no objection to the expeditious disposal of the
execution in view of the three Bench decision of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Rahul S. Shah vs. Jitendra Kumar Gandhi and others, (2021)
6 SCC 418 and a recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil
Appeal Nos. 3640-3642 of 2025 case titled Periyammal (Dead) through
L.R.S. & others Vs. V. Rajamani & Anr. Etc. decided on 6th March,
2025.
7. In the judgment of Periyammal (supra), Para 73 onwards
judgment of Rahul S. Shah (supra) was followed and thereafter all the
High Courts across the country have been directed to call for the
necessary information from their respective district judiciary as regards
pendency of the execution petitions and once the data is collected by
each of the High Courts, the High Courts have thereafter been directed to
issue an administrative order or circular directing their respective district
judiciary to ensure that the execution petitions pending in various Courts
shall be decided and disposed of within six months without fail, otherwise
the concerned Presiding Officer would be answerable to the High Court
on its administrative side.
8. Accordingly, the present C.M.P. is disposed of with a direction to
the learned Additional District and Judge-III-cum-Commercial Court,
Dumka to dispose of the Execution Case No. 2 of 2023 as expeditiously
-2 of 3-
2025:JHHC:29369-DB
as possible keeping in view the mandate of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
referred to hereinabove, subject to there being no impediment in doing so.
9. Pending Interlocutory Application, if any, stands disposed of.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan, C.J.)
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
22.09.2025
N.A.F.R.
APK/VK.
-3 of 3-
