VIJAY SOOD Vs. KANAK DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision calls in question the legality, validity and propriety of the order dated 24.8.2015, whereby the court below rejected the objection of the petitioner/judgment-debtor.

(2.) The admitted facts between the parties are that they are party to Civil Suit No. 200A/2014, which was decided by judgment and decree dated 27.2.2015. The petitioner by filing said application dated 23.6.2015, contended that the decree dated 27.2.2015 is a preliminary decree. Hence, it cannot be put to execution. By taking this Court to the decree, it is urged by Shri N.K.Gupta, learned senior counsel that the decree is required to be implemented by taking necessary steps, which are mentioned in paras 2 and 3 of the decree. Thereafter only it will achieve the finality. In addition, it is urged that the decree holder has filed an application under Order 26 Rules 13 and 14 CPC, which is pending. The said application itself shows that final decree has not been passed.

(3.) Per Contra, Shri V.K.Bharadwaj, learned senior counsel relied on the judgment dated 27.2.2015 and urged that the decree dated 27.2.2015 must be treated as final decree. He relied on an earlier adjudication by this Court in First Appeal No. 6/1993 (Jainarayan vs. Satyanarain). He relied on (Hansraj v. Gomti and others, 1996 JabLJ 357); (Lal Bhagwat Singh vs. Hari Kishen Dasm, 1942 AIR(Oudh) 1); (Madhava Menon vs. Esthapanose and another,1952 AIR(TC) 428); and (Bimal Krishna Khanna v. Kamal Nain Khanna and others, 1999 AIR(Del) 327), in support of his contention that the decree dated 27.2.2015 must be treated as final decree and not preliminary one.