SURAJIT BANERJEE Vs. BAIDYA NATH PRAMANICK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit for eviction filed by the opposite party against the petitioner herein for recovery of khas possession of the suit premises from the petitioner on the ground of reasonable requirement, was dismissed on contest by the learned Trial Court. However, the said decree was set aside in appeal and the learned First Appellate Court passed an eviction decree against the opposite party in the said appeal. THE said decree passed by the learned First Appellate Court was affirmed in Second Appeal by this Honble Court.

(2.) SUBSEQUENTLY, when the said decree was put into execution for recovering khas possession from the defendant-debtor/petitioner, the judgment-debtor/petitioner filed a comprehensive application under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Order 21 Rules 97, 99, 100 and 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure contending inter alia that the said decree cannot be executed as the accommodation which is now available to the judgment debtor is sufficient to satisfy his present requirement.

(3.) LET me now consider as to how far the Learned Executing Court was justified in passing the impugned order in the facts of the instant case.