MAHABIR AND OTHERS Vs. RAJENDRA PRASAD AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Defendant's second appeal arising out of a suit for permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from interfering with the possession of the Plaintiffs over a house. The facts giving rise to this appeal lie within a short compass.

(2.) THE house in dispute originally belonged to one Chheqi Lal who executed a sale -deed dated 13 -12 -1943 (Ex. 1) in favour of the Plaintiff Respondents. One Mst. Liaqun Nisa instituted a suit for possession and demolition against Chhedi Lal, being Suit No. 193 of 1945 which was decreed on 23 -10 -1945. The decree -holder proceeded with the execution of her decree but she was resisted by Mahabir Defendant -Appellant No. 1 who claimed the property as his own on the basis of a theka from the Zamindar. He filed objections (Ex. A10) presumably Under Order 21, Rule 99, Code of Civil Procedure which were allowed by the order dated 14 -12 -1946 (Ex. All). Later Mahabir and Mst. Ram Jiyai executed a sale deed dated 18 -10 -1951 (Ex A1) in favour of the Defendants Nos. 3 to 5 (Appellants Nos. 2 to 4). In these circumstances the Plaintiffs who are the legal representatives of the judgment debtor filed a suit for injunction against the erstwhile objectors and transferees. Thus, the position is that the Plaintiffs of the present suit are the legal representatives as well as vendees of the original judgment debtor whereas the Defendants are the objectors in the execution proceedings and their transferees. The allegations of the Plaintiffs were that they had purchased the house from Chhedi Lal in 1943 and had been in possession over the same since then, that the Defendants threatened to interfere with their possession and hence the suit was filed for permanent injunction and in the alternative for possession also.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the Appellants pressed before me only one ground, namely, that the claim of Mahabir the purchaser in interest of the Appellants having been allowed by the order dated 14 -12 -1946 and Chhedi Lal (judgment -debtor) having not filed any suit for establishing his title Under Order 21, Rule 103 Code of Civil Procedure the order dated 14 -12 -1946 was conclusive against the judgment -debtor, namely, Chhedi Lal and the Respondents claiming title through Chhedi Lal were also bound by the said order and the present suit was, therefore, not maintainable.