Executing Court Cannot Rely On Evidence From Separate Proceedings Between Parties Under Different CPC Provision: HP High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that an executing court can't rely on evidence led in a separate proceeding under a different provision of the Civil Procedure Code between the parties.

The Court remarked that such conduct shows a “complete non-application of judicial mind.”

Justice Ajay Mohan Goel remarked that: “there was a complete non-application of judicial mind by the learned Judge concerned, who did not care to go through the order passed by this Court in the earlier CMPMO”.

The respondent, Basanti Devi, had filed two separate applications before the Executing Court, one under Order 21 Rule 32 CPC, which concerns execution of a decree involving attachment of property and another under Order 21 Rule 31 CPC that deals with enforcement through detention or attachment for disobedience of a decree.

However, while deciding the Order 21 Rule 31 CPC, the court relied upon an earlier evidence from the Order 21 Rule 32 CPC application, which was between the same parties, after it had already been held that such cross-reliance of evidence was impermissible.

The Court noted that the Executing Court showed a disregard for judicial precedent by repeating the same error which was corrected by the High Court in 2017.

The Court remarked that once High Court clarified the legal position, the lower court could not ignore that direction.

Thus, the Court set aside the order passed by the Civil Judge and directed the Executing Court to decide the application filed under Order 21 Rule 31 of the Civil Procedure Code afresh.

Case Name: Mahindra and Mahindra Finance Services Limited & another v/s Smt. Basanti Devi

Case No.: CMPMO No.287 of 2022

Date of Decision: 14.10.2025

For the Petitioner: Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate

For the Respondent: Mr. Kul Bhushan Khajuria, Advocate

Click Here To Read/Download Order