WP/24518/2022 of DROPADI BAI JAIN W/O SHRI GHANSHYAM DAS JAIN (DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES (I) GANESHILAL Vs TEK CHAND on 18 October 2024

ORDER

The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is notdirected against any particular order, but is filed being aggrieved by the arbitraryapproach of the Court of XIIth Civil Judge Senior Division Gwalior inExecuting Case No.33/2016 preferred by the petitioner in the year 1995 for

receiving the possession of the disputed property in lieu of the judgment anddecree passed by this Court in S.A. No.56/1983, whereby while setting asidejudgment and decree of the lower courts, the defendants i.e. present respondentherein was directed to hand over the possession of the property to theplaintiffs/petitioners.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though theexecution proceedings are pending since the year 1995, on one pretext or theother the said execution proceedings are being lingered on by therespondents/judgement debtors and on number of occasions frivolousapplications have been moved by them and though those applications arerejected by the Executing Court, but on the next date they approach withanother application, which is entertained by learned Executing Court and sincemore than 27 years had passed the present petitioner/decree holders are waitingto reap the frutis of the decree, therefore, it would be incumbent to issuedirections to learned Executing Court to execute the said judgment and decreeas expeditiously as possible within a time bound frame.

It was further submitted that earlier also this Court while hearing Civilrevision no.80/2016, wherein rejection of certain applications by the ExecutingCourt were challenged, directions were issued to present respondent/judgmentdebtors to comply with the judgment and decree passed by this Court asexpeditiously as possible and hand over the possession to the presentpetitioners/ decree holders, but even though there were clear directions issuedby this court the possession has not been handed over till date. It was, thus,prayed that the present petition be allowed and the Executing Court be directedto decide the Execution as early as possible.

Since it appears to this Court that disposing of the present petition directing the executing court to decide the said execution at an early date wouldnot cause any prejudice to the respondents, this Court doesn't deems itnecessary to issue notice to the respondents in this regard, but deems itappropriate to direct the learned Executing Court to execute the judgment anddecree passed in S.A. No.56/1983 dated 11.12.1993 as expeditiously aspossible preferably within a period of six months from today.

It is needless to observe that learned Executing Court shall not grant anyundue adjournment to the parties and shall decide the said execution within theaforesaid period.

The petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)JUDGEChandni