The High Court dismissed a civil revision petition challenging the rejection of an objection petition under Order 21 Rule 23 CPC filed during a suit for possession. The court found no infirmity in the lower court's order, noting that the decree holder was entitled to possession as prayed in the suit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL REVISION No.101 of 2016
======================================================
Smt. Abha Agrawal wife of Sri Krishna Kumar Agrawal, resident of Mohalla
Diwan Mohalla Pandaribagali, P.S. Khajekalan, P.O. Jhauganj, District Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.Smt. Chanpati Devi wife of Sri Deo Sharan Singh, resident of village Ranipur Ke Chak, P.S Chawk, District Patna.
...Plaintiff/Appellant/Decree Holder… Opposite Party
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rabindra Kumar, Adv For the Respondent/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar Singh, Adv ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 18-04-2019
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Patna High Court C.R. No.101 of 2016 dt.18-04-2019 2/4
1992 against Defendant/Judgment Debtors for declaration of their title and interest over the suit land and confirmation of their possession and if out of possession then restoration of possession over the suit land by process of court. Title Suit was dismissed against which Plaintiff-Decree Holder preferred Title Appeal which was allowed by judgment and decree dated 31.05.2005, against which Defendant/Judgment Debtor has filed second appeal which is pending for adjudication.
Patna High Court C.R. No.101 of 2016 dt.18-04-2019 3/4
possession.
Patna High Court C.R. No.101 of 2016 dt.18-04-2019 4/4
jurisdictional error in the order passed by the Court below, accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.
(S. Kumar, J)
ranjan/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| Uploading Date | 03.06.2019 |
| Transmission Date | NA |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the execution court committed an error by rejecting the judgment debtor's objection petition filed under Order 21 Rule 23 CPC.
Whether the decree holder is entitled to delivery of possession when title has already been declared and possession was prayed for in the original suit.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Mosst. Fudni Devi & Ors vs. Chotelall Sah & OrsReferred¶17
Mosst. Fudni Devi & Ors vs. Chotelall Sah & Ors since reported in AIR 2007 Pat 41 · Who else cites this
Mosst. Ramsundari Devi & Ors vs. Satban Singh & OrsReferred¶20
Mosst. Ramsundari Devi & Ors vs. Satban Singh & Ors, 1985 BLJ 71
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Abha Agrawal
Smt. Chanpati Devi
Smt. Nirmala Devi
S. Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
