JUDGMENT : By means of present writ petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs, among others: “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 28.05.2016 passed by the learned A.D.J., Vikasnagar in Execution Case No. 13/2013, M/S Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd. vs. Mr. Mashkoor and another (Annexure No. 1). (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the court of learned A.D.J. Vikasnagar to expedite and decide Execution Case No. 13/2013, M/S Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd. vs. Mr. Mashkoor and another, within one month or within or within such time as framed by this Hon’ble Court.” 2. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner/decree holder that the J.D. has already entered appearance before the Executing Court. The mode of paying money under decree has been provided under Order 21 Rule 1 C.P.C. The mode of execution of money decree has been provided under Order 21 Rule 30 C.P.C. Decree holder has moved for execution of award given in his favour by the learned Arbitrator on 30.03.2012. The relevant portion of the award is as follows: “The claimant is awarded Rs. 175076/- with 18% interest PA from 11.11.2011, till the date of realization as per Section 31 (7)(B) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. Rs 2500/- of Arbitrator Fees Rs. 3000/- counsel fee and Rs. 2500/- cost of the present case. The claimant is entitled to realize the amount from the respondents jointly and severally as per terms of the agreement.” 3. In the background of present controversy whereby the executing court has directed the petitioner to furnish some documents, it will be worthwhile to quote the observations made by the Arbitrator herein below: “I have perused the documents i.e. loan cum hypothecation agreement, loan schedule, statement of accounts, the affidavit, arbitration clause 15 of the loan agreement. The claim is within limitation period and sole arbitrator has territorial jurisdiction. The claimant has prayed for the following reliefs:” 4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready to furnish the loan account statement and valuation report in the Executing Court, but so far as the other documents are concerned, they have no relevancy in the execution of the decree and even if these documents have some relevancy, the documents listed at serial no. 1 & 2 of the impugned order might be at Agra in the office of the Arbitrator. The petitioner is not sure, as to whether such documents are traceable or not? The emphasis of learned counsel for the petitioner is that once the award has been given by the Arbitrator after perusing all the documents, the documents mentioned at serial nos. 1 & 2 of the impugned order have lost the relevancy, so far as the execution of a decree is concerned. 5. This Court finds substance in the aforesaid arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner. The Executing Court has to proceed from the stage where the Arbitrator has left the parties. Needless to say that the Arbitrator has already perused the documents, and only on the basis of those documents has given the award. The order impugned is, therefore, interferable to the extent of documents as desired at serial nos. 1 & 2 of the impugned order are concerned. 6. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the loan statement account and valuation report shall be furnished by the petitioner before the Executing Court on the next date. 7. Writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself by setting aside the impugned order, in part, as above. 8. In the facts and circumstances of the case, which have been discussed hereinabove, the Court does not feel it necessary to issue notices to the respondents/judgment debtors. 9. Since the writ petition is being disposed of without issuing notices to the respondents, therefore, liberty is granted to them to move for recall, if they feel aggrieved with the same.