Delhi HC: Mere claims of error do not make a decree invalid

Opposing the plea, advocate Jindal argued that an executing court cannot go behind a decree and said the order had attained finality as it was never challenged.

The Delhi high court has observed that merely alleging that a decree is erroneous does not render it void or non-executable.

The petition sought enforcement of a February 2023 order.

“What is to be determined is only whether the decree in question has been passed by a court lacking inherent jurisdiction, or is otherwise a nullity rendering it non-est, and thus non-executable. Mere allegations to the erroneous nature of the decree cannot render the decree a nullity,” a bench of justices Nitin Sambre and Ajay Digpaul held in a verdict released on May 7.

The observation came on April 28 while the court was hearing an appeal filed by a man against a September 2025 trial court order dismissing his objections to an execution petition filed by Jaskaran Singh Batra, proprietor of Bablu Chik Inn. The petition sought enforcement of a February 2023 order.

In the 2023 order, the trial court restrained the man from using the trademark Bablu Chic Inn and its logo, and directed him to pay ₹3.9 lakh along with default interest.

The man was represented by advocate Ankit Batra, while Batra was represented by advocate Vineet Jindal.

Before the high court, the man argued that he could not be held personally liable merely because he was a director of M/S Rubani Productions Pvt. Ltd., against which the original suit had been filed.

He contended that the January 2021 franchise agreement had been executed between the plaintiff and the company, and not with him in his personal capacity.

Opposing the plea, advocate Jindal argued that an executing court cannot go behind a decree and said the order had attained finality as it was never challenged.

In its nine-page judgment, the high court dismissed the appeal, observing that the man had initially participated in the proceedings but later stopped appearing before the trial court, following which an ex parte decree was passed against him. The court noted that he never challenged the decree before a competent court.

The court further noted that while the company was originally a party to the case, the man was later substituted in its place, contested the matter on merits, and ultimately suffered the decree.

“As such, we have reason to believe that the said decree has attained finality against the appellant through a reading of the relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) and that of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Once the decree was passed, the appellant, being party to the same, became bound by such decree as also in the execution proceedings,” the court said.