MAHADEO Vs. ANANDRAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged an order dated 06/03/2020 passed by the Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Umred (Executing Court) whereby an application filed by the respondent decree holder for execution of the decree and removal of encroachment has been allowed and the bailiff has been directed to remove the encroachment as shown in commissioner's report and map and to handover possession to the decree holder.

(2.) The main ground on which the aforesaid order passed by the Executing Court is being challenged, is that a bailiff report dated 03/07/20218 was submitted before the Executing Court, wherein it was recorded that the decree stood executed to the satisfaction of the respondent decree holder. The said decree had been confirmed against the petitioner upto this Court by

(3.) It appears that thereafter an application at Exh.91 was filed by the respondent decree holder under order under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) for appointment of Court Commissioner, since according to the respondent, some portion of encroachment was yet to be removed. The said application was allowed and the Taluka Inspector of Land Records was appointed as Court Commissioner, who was directed to measure the suit property after issuing notice to the rival parties. It is undisputed that in pursuance of the said order passed by the Executing Court, such an exercise was indeed carried out by the Court Commissioner and it came to light that although the decree was earlier executed as per the report of the bailiff, but still an area of about one meter in length was still under encroachment of the petitioner.