R L MITRA Vs. MINOTI MAZUMDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENT No. 1, Srimati Minoti Mazumdar, who is the owner of house No. 15-A, Stratchy Road, Allahabad, obtained a decree for "the ejectment of one Raghubir Singh from a portion of this house. She put the decree in execution. The appellant R. L. Mitra who is the owner of house No. 15, filed two sets of objections purporting to be under Order XXI, Rule 97/99 and under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure. These were dismissed by the executing court. Thereafter the decree-holder obtained possession by the ejectment of Raghulbir Singh. Thereupon R. L. Mitra filed another objection under Order XXI, Rule 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure alleging that there had been excessive execution and that the decree-holder had obtained possession not only over a portion of house No. 15-A but also over a portion of house No. 15 of which he was the owner. It was prayed that R. L. Mitra be put back into possession over the property from which he had been dispossessed.

(2.) THE executing court dismissed the objection on the ground that similar objections filed by him earlier had already been rejected. The executing court observed that R. L. Mitra had also filed a regular suit for cancellation of the decree obtained by Srimati Minoti Mazumdar. Against the dismissal of his application, R. L. Mitra filed a revision before the District Judge. The Additional District Judge who heard the revision, allowed the same holding that the earlier applications of R. L. Mitra were misconceived and that the orders passed thereon did not bar the present application under Order XXI, Rule 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Additional District Judge directed the executing court to consider the application of R. L. Mitra on merits.

(3.) WE have to see whether the application of R. L. Mitra under Order XXI, Rule 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure was maintainable or not. Order XXI, Rule 100 is in these terms :-