KHAJA SHOUKAT ALI Vs. KHAIRUNNISSA BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners aggrieved by the order dated 6-7-2005, passed by the Junior Civil Judge, Devarakonda, Nalgonda District, allowing the application in E. A.No. 13 of 2004 in E.P.No.5 of 2004 in O.S.No.50 of 1997, filed by the respondents seeking police protection for enjoying the fruits of the decree, have filed this C.R.P.

(2.) The respondents claim to have obtained a judgment and decree for perpetual injunction against the petitioners in respect of the property in O.S.No.50 of 1997 from the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Devarakonda on 30-3-2001. Against the said judgment and decree, the petitioners filed appeal in A.S.No.31 of 2001 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Nalgonda, which was dismissed by judgment dated 31 -7-2003. The said judgment was confirmed by this Court in S.A.No.999 of 2003 by this Court vide order dated 25-3-2004. Thereupon, the respondents filed E.P.No.5 of 2004. During the pendency of the said petition, the petitioners appear to have filed a suit in O.S.No.105 of 2004 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Nalgonda, for declaration of title and perpetual injunction contending thattheir rights were decided in O.S.No.54 of 1983 and thatthey are in possession and enjoyment of the suit property, and obtained orders of interim injunction in I.A.No.610 of 2004. At that point of time, the present application in E.A.No.13 of 2004 was filed by the respondents under Section 151 C.P.C. seeking police protection for enjoying the fruits of the decree obtained by them in O.S.No.50 of 1997, dated 30-3-2001, which on contest by the petitioners, by the order under revision was allowed.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that if the petitioners are said to have disobeyed the judgment and decree obtained by the respondents in the suit, which was confirmed by the first appellate Court and the second appellate Court, the remedy of the respondents is to take recourse to the provisions of Order XXI Rule 32 C.P.C. and not by way of an application under Section 151 C.P.C. seeking police protection. He submits that unless and until the parties are given opportunity to adduce evidence, as provided under Order XXI Rule 32 C.P.C., the Court below could not have allowed the application filed by the respondents under Section 151 C.P.C., and more so when the petitioners had obtained an orderof injunction in l.A.No.610 of 2004 in O.S.No.105 of 2004, which was filed by them when the respondents sought to interfere with their possession, which is still subsisting. In support of this contention, he placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in G. Anandam v. Warangal Municipal Corporation.