BIRDA RAPSANG Vs. ARKY MARBANIANG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision application has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution impugning the order dtd. 24/2/2022, by which the Court of the Additional Judge, District Council Court, Shillong has stayed the proceedings in the Execution Case for execution of the Decree in the Title Suit No. 21 of 2013, wherein the Executing Court had fixed 22/4/2022, as the date of execution.

(2.) Mr. K.S. Kharshiing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that predecessors in interest of the petitioner had instituted a suit being Title Suit No. 21 of 2013 against the respondent for eviction of the defendant, or persons claiming under them from Stall No. 1, (suit property) which has been described in the Schedule of the said Plaint. He further submits that in spite of receipt of summons, as the respondent did not contest the Suit, the same proceeded ex parte and a decree was passed on 24/2/2016. Against this judgment and decree, an appeal was preferred before the Court of the Judge, District Council Court being Title Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2016, which he submits came to be dismissed by order dtd. 10/2/2020, and in the said order itself, the Trial Court was directed to proceed with the Execution case. Subsequently, he submits the Execution Case being No. 4 of 2020, was filed for execution of the decree and on notice being served, the respondent filed an objection thereto, which also came to be dismissed by order dtd. 24/2/2022 by the Executing Court.

(3.) The learned counsel further submits that after disposal of the said objection, the respondent then filed an appeal which was numbered as No. 4 of 2022 before the Court of the Additional Judge, District Council Court, Shillong who passed the impugned order which has been assailed herein. The learned counsel submits that the order is totally without jurisdiction, inasmuch as, in the main appeal before the Judge, District Council Court, which had decided the matter on 10/2/2020, it was directed therein that the Execution Case shall proceed. He further submits that the order has re-opened the matter, which has already been decided, as such the same deserves to be interfered with by this Court in exercise of the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution.