VANRAJ @ BANRAJ Vs. DRAUPADI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the respondents. Perused the impugned order dated 15.2.2018 passed by the Additional District Judge No.4, Ajmer dismissing the petitioner's objection to the execution of the decree dated 29.3.1986 whereby the Court of Munshif (East) , Ajmer directed the eviction of the tenant-Hansraj and which decree has attained finality.

(2.) The petitioner objector-Vanraj is the son of one Madan Singh. It is on record that earlier objection to the execution of the judgment and decree dated 29.3.1986 was filed under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC by the applicant-Vanraj alongwith his brothers, all sons of Madan Singh on 1987. Those objections were dismissed by the executing court on 8.11987. No proceedings were taken against the dismissal and the order dated 8.11987 attained the finality.

(3.) Thereafter, the execution proceedings of the decree dated 29.1986 moving at a snail's pace and reflective of the delays which are endemic, on the decree holders application the executing court on 10.2.2016 issued direction to execute the decree dated 29.1986 by removing any person from the premises concerned thereunder and causing hindrance or refusing to vacate the property. The applicant-Vanraj this time in individual capacity, filed objections under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC on 14.10.2016 seeking to agitate his right to the "suit property", in which execution to the decree dated 29.1986 was underway, as a son/ successor of Madan Singh in whose favour appeal No.82/1992 arising from a suit for partition before the Additional District Judge No.1, Ajmer had been purportedly allowed allegedly holding that he was entitled to 1/7th share of the suit property belonging to the erstwhile owner Harlal his father.