SUHARA BEEVI Vs. SAINUDHEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging Annexure 5 order passed by the Munsiff's Court, Varkala (for short 'the execution court') in E.P. No.15/2016 in O.S. No.99/2004, ordering delivery of the property.

(2.) The petitioner is the judgment debtor, and the respondent is the decree-holder in E.P. No.15/2016. As early as in 2004, a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction was passed against the petitioner, restraining her from trespassing into plaint A and B schedule properties and in the house bearing No.VIII/74-B of Edava Panchayath situated therein. According to the respondent, on 20/4/2015, the petitioner trespassed into the plaint-schedule house and occupied it, violating the decree. It was in these circumstances that the Execution Petition was filed. The prayer in the Execution Petition was to enforce the decree by detaining the petitioner in civil prison for wilful disobedience of the decree and to evict her from the plaint schedule house. In the Execution Petition, the petitioner took up a contention that since the decree was for permanent prohibitory injunction alone, the prayer in the Execution Petition to evict her from the plaint schedule house is not maintainable. The execution court overruled the said contention and delivery was ordered as per Annexure 5 order. It is challenging the said order; this Civil Revision Petition has been filed.

(3.) I have heard Sri. R. Santhosh, the learned counsel for the petitioner.