Facts: The petitioners challenged an order dated 18.04.2023 passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Mudkhed, directing detention of the judgment debtor in civil prison for one month for breach of a decree in Regular Civil Suit No. 456 of 2002. The petitioners argued that no notice was served, nor was an opportunity for hearing granted, before passing the order.
Procedural Posture: The case came before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, as a writ petition challenging the order of the executing court.
Issue: Whether the executing court's order directing detention of the judgment debtor in civil prison without issuing notice or providing an opportunity for hearing is sustainable under the principles of natural justice.
Holding: The High Court held that the executing court's order was unsustainable and quashed it.
Reasoning: The Court found that the executing court passed the impugned order without issuing notice or affording any opportunity of hearing to the judgment debtor, which violates the principles of natural justice. The Court stated, "Such an order, which entails deprivation of personal liberty, is in clear violation of the principles of natural justice." Even if a breach of the decree was noticed, the executing court was expected to issue notice and call for an explanation before ordering detention. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in Bhudev Mallick alias Bhudeb Mallick and Anr. vs. Ranajit Ghoshal and Ors., emphasizing the need to afford an opportunity of hearing before coercive action.