RAJENDRA RAMAKANT VEDPATHAK Vs. TARVIDERSINGH HARBANSINGH POPALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.Railkar, the learned counsel for the Petitioner.

(2.) The challenge in this Petition is to the orders dated 17 November 2018 made below applications at Exhibit Nos.114, 116 and 118 in the course of execution of decree made in Civil Suit No.71 of 2008 and connected matters.

(3.) Mr.Railkar, the learned counsel for the Petitioner points out that the Petitioner or his predecessor-in-title were deliberately not made as parties in Civil Suit No.71 of 2008. He therefore submits that the decree made in the said Civil Suit is clearly not binding upon the Petitioner. He points out that the Petitioner has also instituted a substantive suit in which he has inter-alia prayed for declaration that the decree in Civil Suit No.71 of 2008 is not binding upon the Petitioner. There were also reliefs seeking restraint from dispossession, in pursuance of the decree in Civil Suit No.71 of 2008 and execution proceeding No.21 of 2014. Shri Railkar submits that originally in the year 1987, the father of Respondent No.1 had filed Regular Civil Suit No.253 of 1987 for possession of the suit premises against both the parties in R.C. Suit No.71 of 2008 as well as the predecessor-in-title of the Petitioner. Such Suit had in fact been dismissed. Mr.Railkar submits that this is a very strong ground on basis of which the execution of decree ought not to be permitted against the Petitioner.