(1.) This revision has been filed by the judgement-debtor who suffered decree of partition. Not only the preliminary decree was passed by the Court on 28/7/1990 but it was affirmed in the appeal and attained finality. Thereafter final proceedings were taken-up and final decree also attained finality. Partition of a residential house was ordered by decree and while passing the final decree, it was observed that it was not possible to divide the house in five shares, hence it was necessary to sell the house and the consideration of that would be distributed amongst the parties to the suit.
(2.) After the final decree attained finality petition was filed before the Executing Court challenging the auction of the properties on the ground that plaintiff was a widow and she did not have the right to claim partition of residential house. Hence the decree is a nullity. The Trial Court over-ruled the objection and came to the conclusion that these objections cannot be entertained. Learned Counsel has urged that it is a case where objection raised goes to the very root of the matter and ought to have been entertained and inquired into.
(3.) Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents has supported the impugned order and urged that it is a case where dilatory tactics are being adopted by the judgment- debtor and the Executing Court cannot go behind the final decree. Objections are as to the invalidity of the decree not to its nullity and they are not maintainable and they have been rightly rejected without inquiry.