LINGARAJ TRIPATHY Vs. AGADEHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

(2.) The Petitioner in this CMP seeks to assail the order dtd. 11/2/2019 (Annexure-3) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nayagarh in Execution Case No.2 of 2013 (arising out of T.S. No.67 of 1994), whereby he refused to recall the order dtd. 11/9/2017 directing the Petitioner-Decree Holder (D.Hr.) to deposit the cost of deployment of Police force for execution of the decree.

(3.) It is submitted by Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner that vide order dtd. 11/9/2017, learned executing court while entertaining an application under Order XXI Rule 35 C.P.C. filed by the Petitioner-DHr. directed that ' .. ..Further as there is an apprehension by the DHR that JDR shall cause breach peace at the time of delivery of possession of the suit land, the S.P. Nayagarh be informed to intimate this court the total one day cost of 1/4 APR force who shall be deputed to be remained present at the spot on the date of delivery of possession of the suit land. After receiving information from S.P. Nayagarh regarding one day cost of 1/4 APR force, the DHR shall be required to deposit the same to get police help for execution of the decree. Hence, this petition is allowed and issue letter to the S.P. Nayagarh for the above purpose. Put up on 16/10/17 for awaiting intimation S.P. Nayagarh." The Petitioner being aggrieved filed an application to recall the order dtd. 11/9/2017, which was rejected holding that since the order has already been passed upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, the same does not require any re-consideration. He further submits that such a direction is against the rule of law. It is the duty of the State to uphold the majesty of the court. If the order passed by the learned executing court is accepted, then the poor litigants like the Petitioner will not be in a position to enjoy the fruit of the decree, if the Judgment Debtor (J.Dr.) obstructs execution thereof. In support of his case, he relied upon the decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of Gopal and others v Amar Jeet Singh and others, reported in AIR 2019 ALL 132, wherein it has been held at paragraph-14 as follows: