RAJU BHATT Vs. RISHIRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition is filed assailing the judgment and order dated 10th February, 2015 passed by the Executing Court/Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Rishikesh as well as judgment and order dated 3rd September, 2015, passed by Additional District Judge, Rishikesh, whereby Executing Court was pleased to dismiss the objection filed by the judgment debtor/petitioner, herein, and was further pleased to issue warrant of possession and revision arising therefrom was dismissed by the Revisional Court.

(2.) Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that plaintiff/decree-holder had filed OS No. 05 of 1996, Rishiram v. Sohan Lal Kukreti and others, in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Rishikesh, Dehradun seeking permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants in making any interference in the possession of the plaintiff over the suit property under heading 'A' and 'B'; suit was decreed by the learned Trial Court, vide judgment and decree dated 17.07.2004; judgment and decree dated 17.07.2004 was never challenged before the higher Forum, hence, was allowed to attain finality; plaintiff/decree-holder has moved an execution application being Execution Case No. 07 of 2009 saying defendant/judgment-debtor has forcefully taken possession over the Southern portion of the suit property, therefore, decree dated 17.07.2004 may be executed against the judgment-debtor; having appeared before the Executing Court, judgment-debtor has preferred objection saying that the basis of suit i.e. sale deed dated 19.07.1965 was void ab initio and non est in the eyes of law, therefore, decree passed in Suit No. 05 of 1996 was without jurisdiction, therefore, cannot be executed; objection so filed by the judgment-debtor/petitioner, herein, was dismissed by the Executing Court, vide order dated 10.02.2015; while rejecting the objection, learned Executing Court was further pleased to issue warrant of possession; feeling aggrieved, judgment-debtor has preferred civil revision being Civil Revision No. 33 of 2015, however, revision too came to be dismissed, vide judgment/order dated 03.09.2015; feeling aggrieved, judgment-debtor has knocked the doors of this Court by invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) I have heard Mr. Neeraj Garg, learned counsel for the judgment-debtor/petitioner, herein, and have carefully perused the record as well as the relevant provisions of law.