Execution against non-party company directors in consumer decrees cannot impose personal liability absent guarantees or adjudication of individual culpability.

Execution cannot be used to expand liability to persons who were neither parties to the proceedings nor shown to have furnished guarantees; corporate shareholders or promoters remain liable only to the extent of shareholding or express guarantees, and no material established personal guarantees by the non-party directors, so they cannot be subjected to execution. A declared moratorium against the judgment-debtor company bars execution measures under the consumer statute, preventing attachment or withdrawal from third-party accounts; consequently execution proceedings cannot be pursued indirectly against non-debtors. Procedural safeguards of notice, pleadings, opportunity to contest and evidence are substantive prerequisites before personal liability can be fastened, and absent these the executing forum must decline executability.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether execution of a decree passed exclusively against a company can be proceeded with against its directors/promoters who were not parties to the underlying adjudication and against whom no notice, pleadings, evidence or findings were recorded.

Analysis: The adjudicatory process required for fastening personal liability includes service of notice, pleadings, opportunity to contest, leading of evidence and recorded findings; a decree binds only those against whom it is pronounced. Execution proceedings must strictly conform to the decree and cannot be used to enlarge liability or bind persons who were neither parties nor adjudicated as liable. Where a moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 operates against the corporate judgment-debtor, modes of execution under Section 71 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 are interdicted against the corporate debtor; however, the moratorium does not, by itself, create personal liability of directors/promoters. Piercing the corporate veil is an exceptional remedy requiring specific pleadings and a reasoned determination of abuse, fraud or misuse of corporate personality; absent such pleadings or findings, execution cannot impose personal liability on directors/promoters. The prior confinement of the lis to the company by omission to issue notice to directors/promoters attained finality and cannot be enlarged by execution.

Conclusion: Execution cannot be proceeded with against persons who were not parties to and against whom no adjudication was made in the original proceedings; therefore, the execution applications against the directors/promoters must be declined.

---