JUDGMENT Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J —Heard. 2. In the order under challenge, learned Additional District Judge-II, Kangra at Dharamshala, has rightly concluded that the status of the petitioner-State is that of judgment debtor, hence, not competent to seek refund of the so called excess amount by way of initiating execution proceedings. 3. As a matter of fact, the execution proceedings can only be initiated by the decree-holder. The simple case of the petitioner-State seems to be that it has deposited excess amount consequent upon the award passed by the Reference Court and modified by this Court in cross-objection preferred by the claimants-respondents in the appeal, which was filed by the State. The excess amount, if any, lying deposited, can even be sought to be refunded by way of filing an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Therefore, the impugned order calls for no interference. The petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty reserved to the petitioner-State to seek remedy in accordance with law and in the light of the observations, hereinabove, for refund of excess amount, if any, deposited. Pending application(s) , if any, shall also stand disposed of. Copy "Dasti".