MANRAKHAN Vs. JAYVEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant-judgment debtor has directed this revision under section 115, being aggrieved by the order dated 1-5-2006 passed by 1st Civil Judge Class-II, Vaidhan in execution Case No. 45-A/79 (1999) dismissing his application filed for dismissal of such execution proceeding on the ground of principles of res judicata and holding the same to be barred by time.

(2.) The brief facts of the case necessary to consider the question of admission of this revision in short are that respondents herein filed a Civil Suit bearing 45-A/79 against the applicant for declaration and possession with respect of the land bearing Kh. No. 416/01 area 0.21 acre, situated at village, Binlagi, District Singhrouli. After holding the trial such suit was decreed by the trial Court, vide judgment dated 20-8-2001 (sic : 1991). On challenging such decree by the applicant herein, before the Appellate Court, on consideration by affirming such decree such appeal was dismissed. Such decree of subordinate Appellate Court was also challenged by the applicant before this Court under section 100 of Civil Procedure Code which was also dismissed, vide order dated 1-10-1996. This fact has also come on record that in pendency of the aforesaid appeals subject to some conditions the execution of the impugned decree was stayed. But on account of non-compliance of the conditions of such order the same did not remain operative.

(3.) Subsequent to dismissal of the aforesaid second appeal by this Court, vide dated 1-10-1996 the respondents herein filed the execution proceeding before executing Court on 6-1-1997, on which to deliver the possession of disputed land to the respondents, a warrant of possession was issued against the applicant-judgment debtor, the same was received back with some report of Revenue Inspector. On certain reasons such report of Revenue Inspector was objected on behalf of respondents, on which, vide order dated 11-5-1999 the executing Court called the report of Tahsildar on certain points. When such report was not received from Tahsildar, then vide order dated 13-8-1999 again such report was requisitioned from Tahsildar with a direction to place the same on 16-8-1999. But due to non-payment of process fee by the decree holder such report for want of intimation to Tahsildar could not be received till 16-8-1999, on which again such report was called and case was fixed for such report on 28-8-1999 but till such date no such report was received in spite it on 28-8-1999 in later hours of the day in the absence of the respondents only in presence of the applicant's counsel without calling the Tahsildar report in compliance of the order dated 11-5-1999 and 13-8-1999, on the basis of aforesaid disputed warrant of possession by recording the full and final satisfaction of the decree the execution proceeding was dismissed.