RAM AGARWAL Vs. BRIJENDRA KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision, preferred under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Proce­dure, 1908 (hereinafter referred as C.PC.), is directed against the order dated 22-05-2001, passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division) / Fast Track Court VI, Dehradun, in Misc. Case No. 19 of 2000, whereby the objections moved by the respondents /judgment debtors under Section 47 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. were partly allowed by said court.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) AGAINST said award (judgment debtors / present respondents) filed ob­jections under Section 30 / 33 of Arbi­tration Act, 1940 before Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dehradun, which was registered as Misc. Case No. 101 of 1991. After hearing the parties, learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dehradun, dismissed the objections vide his judg­ment and order dated 27-05-1996, and award was made rule of court. From the record It appears that the present re­spondents aggrieved by said judgment and order preferred Civil Appeal No. 88 of 1997 under Section 39 of the Arbi­tration Act, 1940. After hearing the parties the said appeal was also dis­missed vide judgment and order dated 17-09-1999, passed by II Additional District Judge, Dehradun. Then, the present respondents filed Civil Revision No. 376 of 1999, before the Allahabad High Court. However, after hearing the parties the same was also dismissed vide judgment and order dated 14th October 1999. Finally, the present respondents approached the Supreme Court of India. However, their Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 7601 of 2000, was dismissed by the Apex Court vide its order dated 28-09-2000. The arbitration proceedings being finally stood disposed of, the de­cree holder (present revisionist) filed Ex­ecution Cases No. 30 of 1999 and 31 of 1999, for execution of the award passed by the arbitrator. At this stage, present respondents / judgment debtors filed their objections under Section 47 read with Section 151 of C.FC., which was registered as Misc. Case No. 19 of 2000. By the impugned order dated 22-05-2001, the executing court allowed said objections partly holding that the decree holders are not entitled to pos­session of building of Kandy Lodge. It is directed by said order that in respect of other properties excluding New Brew­ery and Gravel Lodge the decree holder shall file particulars and measurements so that judgment debtors may be evicted from such remaining property.