Uttarakhand High Court
Kurban Rasool And Others --Petitioners vs Batul And Others on 10 November, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2025:UHC:9877
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
10 November, 2025
Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 2040 of 2022
Kurban Rasool and Others --Petitioners
Versus
Batul and Others --Respondents
With
Writ Petition Misc. Single No.2042 of 2022
Kurban Rasool and Others --Petitioners
Versus
Batul and Others --Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. M.S. Tyagi, learned senior counsel assisted by
Mr. Nikhil Singhal and Mr. Sunil Chandra, learned
counsel for the petitioners.
Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the
respondents.
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)
Since these writ petitions are arising out of
a common judgment and order dated 25.05.2022
passed by learned Fourth Additional District Judge,
Haridwar, hence, they are being taken up together
and are being decided by this common judgment.
2. By means of writ petition No.2040 of 2022
(M/S), petitioners have challenged the impugned
order dated 25.05.2022 (Annexure No.1 to the writ
petition) passed by learned Fourth Additional District
Judge, Haridwar, in Civil Revision No.52 of 2017 Smt.
Batul and Others Vs. Kurban Rasool and Others.
2025:UHC:9877
3. By means of writ petition No.2042 of 2022
(M/S), petitioners have challenged the impugned
order dated 25.05.2022 (Annexure No.1 to the writ
petition) passed by learned Fourth Additional District
Judge, Haridwar, in Misc. Case No.01 of 2017 Smt.
Batul and Others Vs. Kurban Rasool and Others.
4. The facts given rise of these two writ
petitions in brief are that an Original Suit No.106 of
1987 Maksood Vs. Mazeed, was filed by Maksood i.e.
predecessor of respondents, for specific performance
before the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Roorkee, District
Haridwar, which was decreed vide judgment and
order dated 27.11.1989. The judgment and order
dated 27.11.1989 has attained finality upto the level
of Hon'ble Apex Court. The decree was put to
execution by the plaintiff-decree holder before the
learned Executing Court, which was registered as
Execution Case No.06 of 2013 Maksood (deceased)
Vs. Kurban and Others. In the said execution,
objection under Section 47 CPC has been filed by the
petitioners/judgment debtors. Thereafter, during the
pendency of said execution case, respondent
preferred an application under Order VI Rule 17 and
Section 152 and 153 CPC seeking amendment in
decree dated 27.11.1989. Learned Executing Court
vide order dated 06.04.2017 in Misc. Case No.04 of
2015 Maksood Vs. Kurbaan and others, dismissed the
application/paper No.4Ka filed by the plaintiffs
seeking amendment in the decree, holding that
plaintiffs/decree holders have not preferred any
objections against the objections filed by defendant/
2025:UHC:9877
judgment debtor under Section 47 CPC, further
whether the decree is enforceable or not would be
ascertained at the time of disposal of objection of
judgment debtor under Section 47 CPC.
Respondents-decree holders challenged the said order
dated 06.04.2017 by filing a Civil Revision No.52 of
2017 Smt. Batul and Others Vs. Kurban Rasool and
Others and Misc. Case No.01 of 2017 Smt. Batul and
Others Vs. Kurban Rasool and Others, before the
learned Fourth Additional District Judge, Haridwar,
which was allowed by a common judgment and order
dated 25.05.2022. Feeling aggrieved, petitioners-
judgment debtors are before this Court.
5. It is contended by learned senior counsel for
the petitioners that the issue involved in both the writ
petitions is that as to whether learned Executing
Court can amend the decree passed by the learned
Trial Court or not and particularly, when the said
decree has been affirmed up to the level of Hon'ble
Apex Court.
6. It is further contended by learned senior
counsel for the petitioners that impugned judgment
and order dated 25.05.2022 has been passed by
learned Revisional Court by a common judgment,
whereby, Civil Revision No.52 of 2017 and Misc. Case
No.01 of 2017 were allowed and the order dated
06.04.2017 passed in Misc. Case No.04 of 2015
Maksood Vs. Kurbaan and others, was set aside and
learned Executing Court was directed to amend the
decree in the light of order passed by learned
Revisional Court.
2025:UHC:9877
7. Learned counsel for the respondents
vehemently opposed the writ petition and submits
that the order passed by learned Revisional Court is
perfect and within the four corners of the law.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties
and have perused the order impugned in both the
writ petitions. Having gone through the impugned
order, this Court is of the view that such order cannot
be passed which is completely in violation of the
settled principles and proposition of law, whereby, it
is propounded that a decree cannot be amended by
an Executing Court.
9. In such view of the matter, both the writ
petitions are allowed. The impugned order dated
25.05.2022 passed by learned Revisional Court is
hereby set aside and the order dated 06.04.2017
passed by learned Executing Court in Misc. Case
No.04 of 2015 Maksood Vs. Kurbaan and others, is
affirmed.
10. Pending application(s), if any, stands
disposed of.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
10.11.2025
PN
