B GANGADHAR Vs. B R RAJALINGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition arises from the order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dated 17-2-1995 made in C.R.P. No. 496/94.

(2.) The petitioner is the judgment-debtor. The respondent laid O.S. No. 375/1985 for declaration of title to and for possession of the property bearing No. 21-6-652 situated at Chelapura, Hyderabad. By decree dated January 25, 1991 the trial Court declared him to be absolute owner of the suit property and also directed the petitioner "his men, tenants to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the land held by the petitioner". The decree had become final. When warrant was issued in execution for delivery of possession, the bailiff returned it on the ground that the petitioner had constructed shops and inducted tenants into possession and that, therefore, he cannot execute the warrant. Thereon, the respondent filed an application under Order 21, Rule 98 read with S. 151, C.P.C. to issue warrant to the bailiff to demolish the shops constructed by the petitioner and delivery vacant possession of the suit house. The executing Court, after enquiry, by its order dated September 30, 1993 directed bailiff by warrant to demolish the shops and to delivery vacant possession to the respondent. The petitioner carried the order in revision but was unsuccessful. This this SLP.

(3.) Two principal contentions raised all through are that in the absence of mandatory induction granted in the decree, the executing Court is devoid of power and jurisdiction to direct demolition of the shops constructed by the petitioner. The second contention is that the tenants in possession being not economiee parties to the decree are not bound by the decree of the trial Court and, therefore, the direction to dispossess them is illegal. The Courts below have rightly rejected both the contentions. Order 21, Rule 101 provides that: