AUDH BEHARI SINGH Vs. SAILENDRA NATH BHATTACHARJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a proceeding under Section 47, Civil P. C. The proceeding was started in connection with a decree for ejectment. That decree was in the following terms :

(2.) Admittedly, the decree-holder applied for execution of the decree without obtaining permission as quoted above. There was, accordingly, the objection under Section 47, Civil P. C., filed by the judgment-debtor, on the ground that without such permission the execution was not maintainable. The learned Munsif taking the view that the decree could not be executed unless the permission, referred to above, had been obtained stayed further proceedings to enable the decree-holder to obtain the necessary permission and he himself took the step of writing a letter to the Officer-in-charge calling for a report within 15 days "whether the temple in question may be removed peacefully and without endangering peace and order" and in the meantime further proceedings in execution were stayed. From, this order of the learned Munsif an appeal was taken by the decree-holder and the learned Subordinate Judge, being of the opinion that, in any event, the condition as to permission, as mentioned above, attached only to the removal of the Mandir, reached the conclusion that there was no bar to the decree-holder's getting possession of the other parts of the suit lands including "structures other than the Mandir", situated thereon, and he directed execution to proceed accordingly. Against this order the present appeal has been preserved by the judgment-debtor.

(3.) On the merits it is difficult for the Appellant to say anything against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge. The order is rather liberal to the judgment-debtor inasmuch as, although the condition imposed is possibly open to serious legal objection, the learned Subordinate Judge has accepted the same and stayed execution, so far as the Mandir is concerned, to which alone the condition was attached and has ordered the execution to proceed with regard to the other parts of the suit property. Clearly, therefore, the appellant judgment-debtor can have no legitimate grievance on the merits.