PT CHOTEYLAL Vs. SUNDER KUNWER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a judgment detor's second appeal from the decree of the Civil Judge, Pilibhit affirming that of the Munsif Pilibhit dismissing his objection under Section 47 Code of Civil Procedure against the execution of a decree. The decree-holder Smt. Sunder Kunwer filed a suit for the possession of a small piece of land. She alleged that the Appellant (judgment debtor) had taken illegal possession of this land. She prayed for recovery of possession of this land. It is important to note that in her plaint she made no allegation that the Defendant had illegally raised any structure on the land nor did he asked for a decree for demolition of these structures.

(2.) When the decree holder applied for execution of the decree, the Appellant raised an objection that the decree could not be executed because the Appellant had raised structures on the land and therefore it was not possible to give her possession without demolishing-the structures but as she had not asked for a decree for demolition she was not entitled to execute the decree which was only for possession of the land. Both the courts below held that a decree for possession impliedly includes a decree for demolition of any structure illegally raised on the land by the judgment debtor. The objection was dismissed by both the courts and the judgment debtor has come here in second appeal.

(3.) I do not agree with the courts below that a decree for possession automatically or impliedly includes a decree for demolition of any structures that may illegally have been raised by the judgment debtor on the land. A relief for possession of land and one for demolition of structures standing on it are two distinct reliefs and the first does not of itself include the second. A decree for demolition means that the structures shall be demolished by or at the expense of the judgment-debtor. A lessor may be entitled to recover possession of his land but not to the demolition, at the lessee's expense, of any structure raised by the latter during tie period of lease--as for example, where the lease provides that the lessee shall erect structures at his own costs but does not provide for the removal of the structures by him on the termination of the lease. In such a case the lessor is entitled to a decree for possession on the termination of the lease but not to a decree for demolition of the structures at the expense of the judgment debtor.