AVIJIT MALLICK Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application alleging police inaction in executing a decree of a Civil Court. Affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no.5 is taken on record. Affidavit-in-reply filed by the petitioners is also taken on record. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits as follows. A Civil Court passed a decree in favour of the petitioners on 30/3/2017. An appeal preferred by the defendants was dismissed on 30/11/2021. Even a second appeal was dismissed for default. On 6/12/2022, the Civil Court was pleased to allow police help for execution of the decree after a contested hearing. The bailiff along with police force went to execute the decree. On the first occasion, they were prevented by a huge mob of at least 200 to 250 persons. The bailiff accordingly gave a report dtd. 9/1/2023. On the second effort of the bailiff was also resisted by not only the judgment-debtor, but also his learned advocates who gathered people to prevent execution. Only a small portion of the scheduled property was handed over. The rest was forcibly withheld. The decree thus could only be partially executed. Accordingly, the bailiff filed a report dtd. 10/8/2023.

(2.) The Schedule, by the way, speaks of two rooms and one flat. What the judgment debtor is trying to hand cover as the scheduled property is a portion of the said flat contained within the said flat. More police force is required to have the decree fully executed.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private respondents submits as follows. The allegations made in the writ petition are denied. The petitioners are trying to wrongly portray the scheduled property and get a decree executed for more than what the decree was meant for. The private respondent has already filed an application before the learned Civil Court that the decree has been satisfied.