MANABENDRA CHAKRABORTY Vs. TAPAN KUMAR SHAW & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In our view, these two appeals are the glaring examples of the Privy Council dictum "trouble starts of a decree holder only after a decree is passed."

(2.) Before we take up the submissions made on behalf of the parties, it would be fit and proper to narrate the facts of these two appeals from which it would be evident how the judgment debtors or their agents had successfully frustrated the decree holders from executing the decree by taking various dubious methods.

(3.) Both these appeals have been preferred against a common judgment and/or order dated 5th June, 1998 passed by the learned Judge, 12th Bench of the City Civil Court, Calcutta in Misc. Cases Nos. 3746-47 of 1997 which arose out of the applications filed at the instance of the appellants under Order 21 Rule 101 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in connection with Title Execution Case No. 66 of 1997. In the applications under Order 11 Rule 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short "the said applications") the appellants had prayed for determination of their right, title and interest in the decretal premises described in the Schedule 'A' to the said applications. Let us narrate the facts leading to filing of the said applications which run as under:-