HAZRAT BABA TAJUDDIN TRUST Vs. ABDUL RAHIM KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE dispute out of which these proceedings in the revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure arise, has a chequered history. The applicant before the Court is a Public Trust registered under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 and is known as the Hazrat Baba Tajuddin Trust. Hazrat Baba Tajuddin was a Sufi saint, who resided at Nagpur . There is an area called Tajbagh in Nagpur , which the applicant Trust claims to be under its control.

(2.) IN the year 1946 a suit for possession (Regular Civil Suit No.134A of 1946) was instituted by one Mohammad Masood Khan against the erstwhile Tajabad Committee for the recovery of the possession of an area admeasuring 8 acres comprised out of field survey Nos.43, 45, 46, 47, 48 and 50 of mouza Bidpeth, Thak No.175, P.H.No.28 of Nagpur. The plaintiff claimed that he had purchased the land from one Nawab Mohiuddin Khan on 2 4 1929. A certain portion of that land, admeasuring 8 acres, was stated to be in the possession of the Tajabad Committee, in respect of which the suit for possession was field. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court by a judgment and order dated 16 6 1947. Regular Civil Appeal No.87A of 1947 was dismissed on 31 12 1949. A second appeal was filed before this Court by the original plaintiff. In the said appeal, a Decree came to be passed in terms of a compromise, which was entered into between the parties, in the following terms :

(3.) . On 10 10 1969, the executing Court rejected the objections raised at Ex.9 on the ground that the decree which had been passed by this Court in terms of the compromise in the Second Appeal had to be executed and the executing Court could neither go behind the decree nor hear the objections which were raised by the other side to the execution. This order of the executing Court was challenged before the District Court at Nagpur in Regular Civil Appeal No.355 of 1969 which was allowed by the learned Extra Assistant Judge on 1 9 1970. The appellate Court remanded the matter back to the trial Court for deciding the objections which had been raised by the appellant, after hearing both the parties. A Second Appeal, being Second Appeal No.183/72, was filed before this Court. During the pendency of the appeal, a compromise pursis came to be filed by the contesting parties and the Court accordingly disposed of the appeal on 22 1 1987 in the following terms :