RANJEET SINGH TOMAR Vs. BANWARILAL SAMDASANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER seeks review of order dated 6.10.97 passed in Civil Revision No.472/97 on the plea of error apparent on the face of record. He claims that revisional Court had failed to consider a crucial document related to title of the disputed house, which constituted an error on record warranting review of the order.

(2.) PARTIES are fighting it out over a house situate at Neemuch. Respondent filed a suit for its declaration and possession and obtained a decree for possession which was later affirmed by this Court. He thereafter took execution proceedings to which petitioner filed objections under Order 21 Rule 97 to justify the obstruction caused by him in execution of decree. He alleged that Respondents had obtained the decree by fraud because disputed house belonged to Neemuch Municipality. His objection was over -ruled. He then filed C.R.No. 472/97 and brought on record Chief Municipal Officer's communication dated 23.4.97. The Revisional Court dismissed his revision petition and affirmed the executing Court order on the ground that he could not allege fraud against the decree in execution proceedings and may do so in a suit for cancellation of such decree.

(3.) PETITIONER 's case seems misdirected on this and so is his reliance on the judgments cited which only provides that applications under Order 21 Rule 97 could be filed by any person and required to be adjudicated on merits.