SHITAL PRASAD Vs. TAPESARA KURMIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is connected with Civil Revision No. 649 of 1948. It appears that the appellants held a decree against the respondents for possession of certain area of land and for demolition of certain constructions. They put the decree in execution and, according to the concurrent findings of both the Courts below got a larger portion of the constructions demolished than they were entitled to and also succeeded in obtaining possession over a larger area than was awarded to them by the decree.

(2.) THE respondents filed an objection in the execution Court, drawing its attention to the fact that the Amin, while purporting to execute the decree, had gone beyond the terms of the decree. The court of first instance ordered that possession shall be delivered back to the respondents over the area on which the decree-holders had obtained possession in excess of the terms of the decree. Further, it held that a sum of Rs. 50/- would be paid as damages to the respondents for the loss caused by the demolition of the building in excess of the terms of the decree.

(3.) THE decree-holders preferred an appeal in the Court of the District Judge and, at the same time, filed a revision in this Court. The respondents filed a cross-objection in the Court of the district Judge. The appeal was heard by the Civil Judge who dismissed it but allowed the cross-objection raising the amount of damages from Rs. 50/- to Rs. 100/ -. Against this decision this second appeal has been preferred.