HAZRATH IMAM HUSSAIN WAKF Vs. NAYEEMA ADIB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner obtained the decree on 12.9.2005. THE Execution Petitions came to be filed on 19.1.2006. Order 21, Rule 54(1) C.P.C. reads as under:"Where the property is immovable, the attachment shall be made by an order prohibiting the judgment&#8209debtor from transferring or charging the properties in any way, and all persons from taking any benefit from such transfer or charge. ".

(2.) BY a reading of the above Rule relating to execution of the decree in the form of attachment of immovable property, it is clear that attachment is mandatorily to be ordered to prohibit the judgment&#8209debtor from transferring or charging the property in any way, and all persons from taking any benefit from such transfer or charge. Apparently in order to secure proper enforcement of the decree, the said mandatory prohibition has been provided under sub&#8209rule (1) of Rule 54 of Order 21. Therefore, there is every justification in the claim of the petitioner in seeking for mandatory direction of attachment in the first instance before the Execution Petitions are subsequently heard, after the presence of the judgment&#8209debtor on a date to be specified under Order 21 Rule 54(1&#8209A) C.P.C.