SAMAR SANTRA Vs. MOTILAL DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the order dated 14th September, 2015 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 5th Court, Howrah in Misc. Case No. 13 of 2007, the petitioner judgment debtor has filed this application for setting aside the impugned order mainly on the ground that law of limitation was not considered by the learned Court below.

(2.) According to the petitioner, the opposite party decree holder had filed an eviction suit against the tenant/petitioner. Initially the said suit was dismissed by the learned Court below. Thereafter, the present decree holder filed an appeal against the said judgment and this time the present opposite party/decree holder got a favourble order from the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court. Thereafter, the present decree holder/ opposite party filed Execution Case bearing No. 1 of 2006, in which the present petitioner/judgment debtor had contested.

(3.) The decree holder/opposite party filed a Misc. Case bearing No. 13 of 2007, under Order 21 Rule 97 for Police help as the execution could not be completed due to resistance by the present petitioner. The Executing Court has passed an order in favour of the present opposite party. Challenging that order the present petitioner judgment debtor has filed an application under Section 151 of CPC which was also rejected by the learned Court below. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the present petitioner contended that the learned Court below failed to appreciate the provisions of Limitation Act and has come to a wrong conclusion.