The learned Counsel appearing for the first respondent states that delivery of possession of the property has already been effected by the Court and hence, this revision petition is liable to be dismissed as infructuous. The first respondent in this Civil Revision Petition appears to have obtained an order of eviction as against the tenant, namely, the second respondent in R.C.O.P.No.9 of 2000. The first respondent succeeded in all the forums upto Supreme Court and ultimately, filed execution petition in E.P.No.1 of 2008 and at that stage, some third parties belonging to Wakf filed a petition under Section 89 and 90 of the Wakf Act stating that they are the title holder. The revision petitioner also filed a petition under Order 21, Rule 26 of C.P.C. to stay the delivery proceedings in the execution petition pursuant to the decree in R.C.O.P. No.9 of 2000. The lower Court has rightly dismissed the petition on the ground that the petition filed by the third parties are only to drag on the proceedings. This Court do not find any merits in this Civil Revision Petition. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ is absent and the delivery is also stated to have been effected through Court. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as
