JEROME SALDANHA Vs. KAUSALYA PURUSHOTHAMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition filed by the decree-holder who had obtained an order of eviction against the respondent in HRC No. 12 of 1989 on the file of Munsiff at Mangalore. An eviction was ordered to evict the respondent herein in the above House Rent Case proceedings by the Trial court on 25-3-1989. Petitioner lodged an execution petition to take possession of the property in question in Exc. No. 695 of 1989. The Executing Court issued an order of delivery warrant directing the Court Bailiff to put the decree-holder in possession of the property in question by evicting the respondent-judgment debtor. At the request of the decreeholder the Court also ordered for the police help to execute the decree. Accordingly, the Court Bailiff put the decree-holder in possession of the property and the decree-holder also accepted delivery of possession and delivery receipt was also executed by the decree-holder on 6-3-1990. On the same day he has also executed an inventory for having taken possession of the moveable properties of the judgment-debtor therein. In addition to that, he has also executed an indemnity bond in favour of the court for having obtained possession of the moveables of the judgmentdebtor. Thus, it is clear that the Court Bailiff has given an effective delivery by putting the decree-holder in actual possession of the premises in question and thereby the decree has been executed to the full satisfaction of the decree-holder in view of the delivery receipt executed by the decree-holder.

(2.) ON 4-4-1990 Counsel for the decree-holder filed a memo to the Executing Court, which reads aa under:

(3.) LOOKING into the order sheet maintained by the Executing Court, one can say that delivery of possession was accepted by the decreeholder and even according to the decree-holder, judgment-debtor by breaking open the lock has trespassed upon the property in question and has been squatting there as a trespasser.