The Punjab and Haryana High Court has sought a status report from the District Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, over an Additional District Judge’s order that allegedly recorded that the High Court had stayed execution proceedings, when the stay had actually been granted by the Additional District Judge hearing a challenge to the arbitration award.
Justice Lapita Banerji passed the order on September 16, 2026, in Hardev Singh and Ors. v. Punjab State Warehousing Corporation and Anr., Criminal Revision No. 6970 of 2026.
Background
The revision petition challenged an order dated March 27, 2026, passed by the Additional District Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, directing warrants of attachment against the property of the judgment debtors.
During the hearing, counsel for Punjab State Warehousing Corporation placed before the High Court an order dated August 19, 2026, passed in Execution Petition EXE-86-2024. It was submitted that there was no High Court order dated April 21, 2026, concerning the parties which could have been relied upon to stay the execution proceedings.
Senior counsel for the petitioners explained that the stay order dated April 21, 2026, had actually been passed by the Additional District Judge hearing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, but the executing court had recorded it as an order of the High Court.
The High Court treated the issue as serious and also noted discrepancies concerning the recording of appearances in the August 19 order.
The Court directed that a status report be obtained from the District Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, explaining how the anomaly occurred. It also sought an explanation regarding the order recording that the decree holder’s presence was awaited while simultaneously showing the appearance of its counsel, and recording the presence of counsel for judgment debtors Nos. 3 to 6 after stating that judgment debtors Nos. 1 to 7 had been proceeded against ex parte.
"Since a serious issue has been raised by the learned counsel for respondent No. 1, let a status report be called from the learned District Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, explaining the anomaly that has crept into the order dated August 19, 2026, passed in EXE-86-2024."
The High Court called for the status report and adjourned the matter to November 30, 2026.
-300x169.webp)
