HARI CHAND Vs. MADAN MOHAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner now represented through his LRs is a judgment debtor in a suit for specific performance filed by plaintiffrespondent Madan Mohan against Ram Lubhai. The suit of respondent Madan Mohan for specific performance was dismissed by the trial Court but the lower Appellate Court had decreed the suit of plaintiffrespondent in specific performance against Smt. Ram Lubhai. Copy of the decree passed by the Court has been placed on record as Annexure P-1. Since the petitioner was co-defendant with J.D.- Defendant no.1, a direction was also issued that the petitioner being a subsequent vendee and in possession of the property would join defendant no.1 in executing sale deed in favour of plaintiff-respondent.

(2.) The decree has already been executed. So far as the execution of the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff-respondent is concerned, the Executing Court has issued warrants of possession against the petitioner who had claimed that he was in occupation of the shop in dispute as a tenant and that the tenancy rights later on merged into ownership rights on purchase of the property from defendant no.1. The objections filed by the petitioner have been dismissed by the Executing Court resisting delivery of possession.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner objector has submitted that the decree which ought to be executed was merely for execution of the sale deed and no decree for possession had been passed in favour of the plaintiff-respondent, as such, in execution of the decree for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 05.09.1992, the defendant-appellant cannot be evicted.