Dismissed¶14

Sarbamangala Jha and Ors. v. Shib Sankar Mondal and Ors.

Calcutta HC20 May 2025CO/1234/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

C.O. 1234 of 2025; Article 227 of the Constitution of India; Section 151 CPC; Title Execution Case No. 02 of 1994; Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1st Court, Asansol; order dated 1st February 2025; bailiff directed to break open padlock of decreetal property as per writ; vacant possession to decree holders; judgement debtors' objection regarding non-decreetal property; district Nazir report on identification and resistance; petition dismissed, no order as to costs; Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.; decision dated 20.05.2025.

What did the court decide?

This Court found that the learned Judge of the Executing Court had directed the bailiff to break open the padlock of the decreetal property as per the writ for handing over vacant possession of the same to the decree holders. ¶12

Sarbamangala Jha and Ors. Vs Shib Sankar Mondal… — Writ and Judicial Review | Calcutta HC (2025)

¶1

Sl.139 20.05.2025 Court No.6 BP

¶2

C.O. 1234 of 2025

¶3

Sarbamangala Jha & Ors. -versus-

¶4

Shib sankar Mondal & Ors.

¶5

Mr. Uday Sankar Bhattacharya Ms. Sudeshna Basu Thakur Ms. Banani Bhattacharya ..for the petitioners

¶6

This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the judgement debtors and is directed against an order dated 1^st February, 2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1^st Court at Asansol in Title Execution Case No. 02 of 1994.

¶7

By the order impugned the application filed by the decree holders under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure was allowed and the bailiff was directed to break open the padlock of the decreetal property as per writ for handing over the vacant possession of the said in favour of the decree holders.

¶8

The learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that in the garb of taking possession of the decreetal property the bailiff should not disturb the possession of the petitioners in respect of the property which is not the decreetal property.

¶9

It appears that the learned judge has taken note of the report of the district Nazir wherein it has been stated that they have not faced any difficulty in execution of the

¶10

¶11

decree as regards its identification but resistance to the execution proceeding has been posed at the instance of the judgement debtors.

¶12

This Court finds that the learned Judge of the Executing Court has directed the bailiff to break open the padlock of the decreetal property as per the writ for handing over the vacant possession of the same in favour of the decree holders.

¶13

In view thereof, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioners cannot have any reasons to feel aggrieved.

¶14

Accordingly. C.O. 1234 of 2025 stands dismissed.

¶15

There shall be, however, no order as to costs.

¶16

Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously on compliance of usual legal formalities.

¶17

(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)

Sarbamangala Jha and Ors. v. Shib Sankar Mondal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarbamangala Jha and Ors. v. Shib Sankar Mondal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Utpal Kumar Saha Vs Amar Singh

Biswanath Jana Vs Sabitri Devi and Anr.

Shri Shri Shiv Thakur and Shri Shri Mahavir Jew Deities Rep by Sajit Krishnan Kutty and Ors. Vs Haridwar Tiwari Tripathi and Ors.

Sankar Sutradhar Vs Tarun Ranjan Sarkar and Anr.

Sumit Singh Vs Avijit Pal

Anjali Roy (Mondal) and Ors. Vs Usha Holding Enclave Pvt.Ltd and Ors.