MOHD. ANAS KHAN Vs. SHAHID WARSI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to the eviction decree dated 5.12.2009, an Execution Case No. 01 of 2010 was filed by the decree-holder in which an objection was put under Order 21 Rule 97 by one Mohd. Ahmad Jafri claiming to be in physical possession of the suit property. It appears that during the pendency of this application, a sale deed dated 24.8.2011was executed in favour of the revisionist by Mohd. Ahmad. Thereafter he filed application 22-Ga/1 for impleading him as co-applicant in the abovenoted application under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC.

(2.) The Court below has rejected the request of the revisionist/applicant on the ground that the applicant namely Mohd. Muin Ahmad Jafri had given up his right to object to the decree or obstruct to the execution of the eviction decree and further that the applicant is not a necessary party. The claim made by the applicant that he has been put in possession on the basis of the sale deed dated 24.8.2011 has been rejected on the ground that the provisions of Order 21 Rule 97 are not available to him.

(3.) In any case, it is admitted to the revisionist that he got the sale deed during the pendency of the application under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC filed by his vendor.