ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Vs. KARAN RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Sec. 115 of CPC assailing the order dtd. 19/2/2020 and consequential docket order dtd. 20/3/2020 terminating the E.P. by endorsement that warrant is executed in E.P.No.16 of 2018 in O.S.No.27 of 1999 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Medak.

(2.) The facts that led to the filing of the present Civil Revision Petition, in nutshell, are as follows: The first respondent filed the suit O.S.No.27 of 1999 against six defendants for specific performance of contract in respect of the suit schedule property by virtue of an agreement of sale dtd. 1/11/1996 which was executed by defendant Nos.1 to 4 therein in favour of the fist respondent / plaintiff. The said suit was decreed ex parte on 28/3/2000. The first respondent filed E.P.No.11 of 2002 in the said suit wherein the trial Court directed the defendant Nos.1 to 4 to execute and register a regular sale deed in respect of the E.P schedule property in his favour within three months from that date and in the event the defendants did not do so, the first respondent / plaintiff is entitled to get the same through Court. Since the J.Drs did not execute sale deed in favour of the first respondent, the first respondent filed E.P.No.11 of 2002 and the Court below, on behalf of the defendants, executed a sale deed in favour of the first respondent in the said E.P. While so, during the pendency of the E.P.11 of 2002, one Sambaiah Nayak filed E.A.No.14 of 2006 in E.P.No.11 of 2002 to raise attachment in the said E.P. to an extent of Ac.15-10 guntas in Sy.No.252 and Ac.0-33 guntas in Sy.No.250 situated at Ramanthapur Village, Yeldurthy Mandal, Medak District wherein the first respondent filed his counter. After adducing evidence, the Court below dismissed the said E.A.No.14 of 2006 on 31/12/2014. Subsequently, the first respondent filed E.A.No.9 of 2017 in E.P.No.11 of 2002 to deliver the possession of the schedule properties to him wherein the trial Court issued warrant to the Field Assistant to deliver the vacant possession of the schedule properties to the first respondent. The Field Assistant submitted his report stating that the warrant could not be executed as there is mango garden and some structures are existing thereon. The first respondent requested the trial Court to grant some time to take further steps to remove structures over the property and also on the ground that his mother-in-law had expired. As there was no progress in the matter despite ample time being given, the trial Court closed the E.P. with liberty to the first respondent to take steps and to file fresh execution petition to deliver possession. Hence the first respondent filed the above E.P. praying the Court to remove the obstacles and the obstructions.

(3.) In the above E.P No.16 of 2018 there was no contest from the side of the respondents /J.Drs. The executing Court by order dtd. 19/2/2020 directed the Field Assistant to remove the obstacles / obstructions found in the schedule properties and to deliver vacant possession of the property to the first respondent/D.Hr. The trial Court further directed the Field Assistant to remove any person bound by the decree who may refuse to vacate the schedule properties with the assistance of the Surveyor and police while executing the warrant to the D.Hr. in respect of the schedule property admeasuring Ac.15-10 guntas in Sy.No.250 (Ac.1-30 guntas out of Ac.16-30 guntas) and Sy.No.252 (Ac.13-20 guntas out of Ac.16-20 guntas) situated at Ramanthapur village, Yeldurthy Mandal, Medak District.