TATHEER FATIMA Vs. NEELU DANDHIYA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Execution First appeal filed by the appellant objector arises out of the order dated 06.11.2015 passed by the Additional District Judge No.11, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as "the executing court") in the objection petition No.19/2015 filed by the appellant under Order 21, Rule 97 of CPC.

(2.) This is one of the classic cases of misuse of process of law, whereby the present appellant-objector wife of the respondent No.2-judgment debtor, had filed the objection petition before the executing court obstructing the respondent No.1-decree holder from taking over the possession of the suit premises, after the respondent No.2, having failed in all the proceedings right up to the Supreme Court.

(3.) The short facts of the present case are that the present appellant-objector happens to be the wife of the respondent No.2 Shri Abdul Sami, the judgment-debtor, against whom the respondent No.1 Smt. Neelu Dandhiya, the decree holder, had filed the suit seeking specific performance of the agreement dated 14.12.2006 executed in her favour by the respondent No.2 along with his four brothers in respect of the property being house No.C-107, Shivaji Marg, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur. The said suit having been decreed by the trial court on 05.09.2012, the respondent No.2-judgment debtor had preferred the first appeal before the High Court, which was dismissed on 08.12.2014. The respondent No.2 having filed the SLP before the Supreme Court, the same was dismissed on 07.05.2015. It appears that thereafter the respondent No.1- decree holder had filed the execution petition for execution of the said decree for specific performance of the agreement in question passed in her favour, and the sale deed was also executed in her favour through Court on 29.04.2015. Thereafter the appellant-objector filed the objection petition before the executing court on 15.05.2015 stating interalia that the part of the property in question was orally gifted to her by her father-in-law late Shri Abdul Samad on 05.10.1981, and the same was reduced into writing in presence of two witnesses on 03.11.1981, and that she was in possession of the said part of the property since then. The appellant-objector had also filed an application requesting the executing court to frame points of determination and to grant her permission to lead the evidence. The executing court vide the impugned order dated 06.11.2015 dismissed the said application as well as the objection petition of the appellant, against which the present appeal has been filed.