RAVINDRA PAL KAUR Vs. PANDIT KEDAR NATH PRABHAKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri A.K.S. Bais, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.1.

(2.) The petitioner claiming himself to be the owner and landlord of the premises in dispute instituted SCC Suit No.21 of 2002 for eviction of one Ali Hasan alleging him to be his tenant who is now dead and is represented by respondents No.2, 3 and 4. The said suit was decreed ex-parte on 24.3.2004. The said ex-parte decree was put in execution by the petitioner by means of execution No.7 of 2006. In the said execution, respondent No.1 moved application under Order XXI Rules 97, 99, 103 read with Section 151 C.P.C. objecting to the execution. The application was rejected by the court of first instance vide order dated 20.7.2007. Aggrieved by the same, respondent No.1 filed SCC Revision No.23 of 2007. The revision has been allowed and after setting aside the order of the court below the matter has been remanded for decision afresh.

(3.) The submission of Sri Bais, learned counsel for the petitioner is that an application under Order XXI Rules 97, 99 and 103 C.P.C. as filed by respondent No.1 was not maintainable and, therefore, the revisional court has erred in passing the impugned order holding it to be maintainable. He submits that there is a distinction between a decree of ejectment and decree for possession in respect of immovable property and in proceedings of execution of a decree of small causes court the provisions of Order XXI C.P.C. are not applicable.