PHOOLA BAI Vs. SHIV NATH MOTI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN execution petition moved by the present non -petitioner, the petitioner preferred objections which were disallowed by the Executing Court, viz. the Civil Judge, Kota, by order dated 19 -3 -1981. The petitioner's appeal against the rejection of her objections was also dismissed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 2 Kota, on 29 -11 -1986. It is against this order that she has come in this revision petition.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that the property in dispute belonged to Shri Vasu Pujjiyaji, Kota (here in after referred to as the temple), and the petitioner's mother Smt. Ida was a tenant in two shops of this temple at a monthly rent of Rs. 8/ -p.m. A suit for rent and eviction was filed on behalf of the temple, which was decreed on 22 -4 -1963. Smt. Ida preferred an appeal before the District Judge Kota, and that was also dismissed on 27 -5 -1965. Thereafter no proceedings took place in court till the year 1975, when the present respondent moved an application for the execution of decree for rent and possession of the property, for which decree was passed. According to the non -petitioner he applied for the execution of the decree because he had purchased the property from the temple, on 12 -5 -1973, by virtue of a registered sale -deed and as such had became owner of the same and was entitled to execute the decree passed in favour of the vendor.

(3.) THE reply of the non -petitioners to these objections was that the compromise alleged by the petitioner was not verified before any Court and as such could not be acted upon and as regards the second objection, it was contended that by virtue of Section 146, CPC and Order 21, Rule 16, CPC, in which an explanation has been added, the transferee of a decree could apply for the execution of a decree without a separate assignment.