JUDGMENT : DEVASHIS BARUAH, J. 1. Heard Mr. P. Mahanta, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 2. The petitioner herein who is one of the legal representatives of the judgment debtor Hemendra Das (since deceased) has filed the present proceedings challenging the order dated 16.05.2025 passed by the Court of the learned Munsiff No.1, Nagaon in Misc. (J) Case No.65/2025 arising out of Title Execution Case No.06/2013 whereby the application filed under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was rejected. 3. This Court taking into account that the execution proceedings pertains to the year of 2013 and the suit was of the year 2006, takes up the instant application for disposal at the motion stage itself. 4. The grievance of the petitioner herein is that he along with Shri Swapan Das; Shri Utpal Das and Shri Jitumoni Das are the legal representatives of Late Hemendra Das who was the judgment debtor. The attention of this Court has been drawn to the judgment passed by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court in RSA No.185/2003 wherein Late Hemendra Das was substituted by his legal representatives and inspite of that, the decree holders in Title Execution Case No.06/2013 are proceeding against the deceased judgment debtor Late Hemendra Das without substituting the legal representatives of the judgment debtor. 5. This Court finds it relevant at this stage to take note of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of V. Uthirapathi vs. Ashrab Ali and Others , (1998) 3 SCC 148 which lays up as to how the Executing Court is required to proceed when the judgment debtor had expired. Paragraph Nos.14 & 15 of the said judgment being relevant is reproduced herein under:- “14. In our opinion, the above statement of law in Mulla’s Commentary on CPC, correctly represents the legal position relating to the procedure to be adopted by the parties in execution proceedings and as to the powers of the civil court. 15. It is clear, therefore, that if after the filing of an execution petition in time, the decree-holder dies and his legal representatives do not come on record — or the judgment-debtor dies and his legal representatives are not brought on record, then there is no abatement of the execution petition. 15. It is clear, therefore, that if after the filing of an execution petition in time, the decree-holder dies and his legal representatives do not come on record — or the judgment-debtor dies and his legal representatives are not brought on record, then there is no abatement of the execution petition. If there is no abatement, the position in the eye of law is that the execution petition remains pending on the file of the execution court. If it remains pending and if no time-limit is prescribed to bring the legal representatives on record in execution proceedings, it is open in case of death of the decree-holder, for his legal representative to come on record at any time. The execution application cannot even be dismissed for default behind the back of the decree-holder’s legal representatives. In case of death of the judgment-debtor, the decree-holder could file an application to bring the legal representatives of the judgment-debtor on record, at any time. Of course, in case of death of judgment- debtor, the Court can fix a reasonable time for the said purpose and if the decree-holder does not file an application for the aforesaid purpose, the Court can dismiss the execution petition for default. But in any event the execution petition cannot be dismissed as abated. Alternatively, it is also open to the decree-holder’s legal representatives, to file a fresh execution petition in case of death of the decree-holder; or, in case of death of the judgment-debtor, the decree-holder can file a fresh execution petition impleading the legal representatives of the judgment-debtor; such a fresh execution petition, if filed, is, in law, only a continuation of the pending execution petition — the one which was filed in time by the decree- holder initially. This is the position under the Code of Civil Procedure.” 6. From a perusal of the above quoted paragraphs of the judgment, it is seen that the Supreme Court has made it clear that there is no abatement if the judgment debtor dies and the legal representatives are not properly brought on record and the execution proceedings remains pending on the file of the Executing Court. From a perusal of the above quoted paragraphs of the judgment, it is seen that the Supreme Court has made it clear that there is no abatement if the judgment debtor dies and the legal representatives are not properly brought on record and the execution proceedings remains pending on the file of the Executing Court. However, in the case of the death of a judgment debtor, the decree holder could file an application to bring the legal representatives of the judgment debtor on record at any time and the Court can fix a reasonable time for the said purpose and if the decree holder does not file an application for the said purpose, the Court can dismiss the execution petition for default. It was also observed by the Supreme Court that it is open to the decree holders to file a fresh execution petition in case of the death of the judgment debtor thereby including the legal representatives of the judgment debtor and such a fresh execution petition, if filed, is in law only a continuation of the pending execution application - the one which was filed in time by the decree holders initially. 7. Taking into account the said law, as it is an admitted fact that the original judgment debtor (since deceased) had expired and the same is very much apparent from the judgment and order passed by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court in RSA No.185/2013, this Court disposes of the instant petition directing the learned Court of the Munsiff No.1, Nagaon (the learned Executing Court) to proceed with the execution case being Title Execution Case No.06/2013 by taking note about the death of the original judgment debtor and thereupon provide opportunity to the decree holders to file appropriate application for substitution of the legal representatives of the original judgment debtor. 8. With the above, the instant proceedings stands disposed of.