UMAPRASAD PAL Vs. MRITYUNJAY PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a rule obtained by the decree-holders in a partition suit, being Title Suit No. 14 of 1962 challenging the order of the munsif qua Executing court under Order 21. Rule 100 and 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure by which Mritvuniay Pal a pro forma defendant in that very suit, has been directed to be put into possession of the disputed property here - the northern portion of plot No. 902 admeasuring 11 acres, and forming part of the final decree .

(2.) In the original suit, no relief was claimed against Mritvunjay Pal. All the same he was dispossessed of the property in controversy in execution of the decree by the decree-holders with the result aforesaid order for restoration of his possession.

(3.) AP a matter of words, O. 21, R. 100 has little repellent here. A judgment-debtor means a person against whom a decree has been passed: vide section 2(10) upon which Mr Pal relies Mritvuniay is a person against whom no decree has been passed. He is, therefore a person other than a judgment-dentor within the meanims of Order 21 Rule 100. And such a one has been dispossessed of the immovable property in dispute here by the holders of the decree for possession thereof So, there is all that is required to invoke Order 21. Rule 100 Mritvuniav diri no more.