PRATIBHA SINGH Vs. SHANTI DEVI PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been tiled under Order XLIII, Rule 1(i) of the Code of Civil Procedure and is directed against the order dated 23.12.1998, passed by Seventh Subordinate Judge. Ranchi. in Misc. Case No. 26 of 1998. arising out of Execution Case No. 1 of 1983A, whereby the said Misc. case was dismissed as not maintainable.

(2.) EXECUTION Case No. 1 of 1983A was filed to execute a decree for specific performance of agreement for sale passed in Title Suit No. 125 of 1981. Decree holder deposited the balance amount of consideration and filed draft sale deed, which was approved. The approved draft deed was typed on stamp paper and filed in Court, which was sent to registration office and on 23.12.1998 the Court executed the sale deed. Judgment debtors in their petition filed on 14.12.1998 purporting to be under Sections 340 read with Section 195(1)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Sections 191, 192, 193, 209, 378, 466, 470 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code made prayer to make a preliminary enquiry and record finding that offence under the aforesaid sections of the Indian Penal Code was committed and file complaint thereof. A prayer was also made not to use forged document of execution petition and the sale deed typed on stamp paper and non -existent sketch map, which was got approved fraudulently, till the matter of forgery and fraud was finally decided. Further prayer was made to initiate a proceeding for contempt of Court against the decree holders.

(3.) IN my view, the executing court rightly rejected the Misc. Case No. 26 of 1998. There was no occasion for filing complaint for initiating a criminal proceeding against the decree holders. In the opinion of the executing court no forgery was committed by the decree holders. There was also no occasion for starting any proceeding for committing contempt of any order of the executing court by the decree holders.