(1.) CURTAINS have to be finally drawn and a decree passed more than 20 years ago has to be allowed to be executed, despite all the obstacles and obstructions put by the petitioners in its proper execution.
(2.) SUIT was initially dismissed by the trial Court but in appeal the learned District Judge vide judgment dated 2nd March, 1984 decreed the suit for possession. The appeal filed against this judgment was dismissed by the High Court on 18th March, 1997. The decree assumed finality.
(3.) NOT satisfied the petitioners filed yet another set of objections and the learned Executing Court vide order dated 30th June, 2006 rejected the said objections also by imposing costs of Rs.1,000/- and ordered for the re- issuance of the warrant of possession. This order was also challenged in this Court in Civil Revision No.105 of 2006. The judgment of this Court dated 26th July, 2006 in the aforesaid Civil Revision No.105 of 2006 reveals that the revision petition was dismissed as withdrawn by the petitioners with liberty to approach the Executing Court for identifying the half portion for demolition. Various categorical observations were made by this Court in the course of the order dated 26th July, 2006, even though liberty was given to the petitioners to make an application before the Executing Court.