SAROJ THAKUR Vs. INDO ARYA CENTRAL TRANSPORT LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a classic example of protracting the litigation at every tier of an adjudicatory system and ultimately on the peripheral of the execution proceeding resultantly denying the decree-holder of the fruits of the decree though has ripen yet reverted back to its bud at the behest of the parties claiming their independent right, title and interest in respect of the decretal property. The decree for eviction obtained by the appellant has not been executed as yet as resistance appears to have been seen from various corners and the Court is adjudicating the issues as and when raised.

(2.) The instant appeal originates from an order of the Executing Court which impedes the rights of the appellant/decree-holder from proceeding with the execution case and a vehement objection is raised on the maintainability of an appeal before this Court.

(3.) Mr. Bose, learned Advocate appearing for the applicant in the Executing Court took a preliminary objection that in view of the provisions contained under Sec. 21(1)(a) of The Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act, 1887, the appeal would not lie before the High Court as the reliefs claimed by his client in an execution proceeding was valued at Rs.100.00 and, therefore, the Court before embarking its journey on the circumference of Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure should decide the said preliminary objection. Before we proceed in this regard, it would be apposite and profitable to quote the provisions contained under Sec. 21 of the said Act which runs thus:-