BABU NANDAN Vs. MST SUMITRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a judgment-debtor's second appeal and arises in the following circumstances: Smt. Sumitra, the decree-holder respondent filed a suit in the court of Munsif for recovery of possession against the appellant treating him as an Asami. That suit was ultimately decreed after contest. The decree-holder Smt, Sumitra made an application for execution of the decree for possession in the court of Munsif, Jaunpur. The judgment-debtor appellant objected to the execution of the decree on the ground that the decree sought to be executed was a nullity as it was passed by a court which bad no jurisdiction to do so. The contention was that the suit was one under Section 202 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, which was exclusively cognizable by a revenue court and the civil court had no jurisdiction to entertain it, and in entertaining it and passing a decree on the basis of it the civil court has acted wholly without jurisdiction.

(2.) The court executing the decree upheld the objection and dismissed the application for execution. The lower appellate court has reversed that decree and held that the execution court could not go into the question of the validity of the decree and was bound to execute it as it stood. Aggrieved with the decree of the lower appellate court the judgment-debtor has come up in second appeal to this Court.

(3.) It has been strenuously urged before me that the lower appellate court in coming to the conclusion that even if it is apparent on the face of the record that the decree sought to be executed was a nullity, the court executing it had to give-effect to it, has erred in law.