JUDGMENT : SANJAY KAROL, J. 1. Decree for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- along with interest stood passed against the present petitioner-judgment debtor. Record reveals that the judgment debtor had also independently initiated proceedings under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, wherein the bills pertaining to which the decree stood passed were quashed. Resultantly no amount was due and payable by the present petitioner in terms of the bills, so issued by the respondent authorities. 2. In this view of the matter, objections filed by the respondent, in execution petition ought to have been allowed. It is not a question of going behind the decree but of no amount due and payable by the judgment debtor to the decree holder. It is in this backdrop that impugned order dated 02.08.2004, passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division) 1, Dharamshala, in Objections to Execution Petition No.29-X/2003, titled as Telecom Deptt. Through its A/Cs Officer (TRA) Office G.M.T.D. Dharamshala v. Pradeep Kumar, needs to be quashed and set aside. Ordered accordingly. Amount deposited, if any, by the petitioner be disbursed to him. 3. In view of the above, present petition stands disposed of, so also pending application(s), if any.