Petitioners challenged an order allowing delivery of possession in an execution case. The court held that since title was decreed in favor of the plaintiffs, allowing possession was correct and dismissed the petition.
Petition dismissed with no interference in the order of the Executing Court allowing delivery of possession.
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 MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.42 of 2020
======================================================
... ... Petitioners
Versus
... ... Respondents
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad For the Respondent/s: Mr.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 20-02-2020
The present application has been filed “ for quashing the
order dated 28.08.2019 which is passed by learned 1st Munsif, Sasara,
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.42 of 2020 dt.20-02-2020 2/3
Rohtas in Execution Case No. 03/2017 contained in (Annexure-7) whereby and whereunder the learned court below illegally allowed the petition dated 08.08.2019 under Order-21, Rule 35 of the C.P.C.”
petitioners/defendants 1st Set and on consideration of the materials on record, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. It is not in dispute that the suit has been decreed in favour of the plaintiffs/respondents 1st Set and title to the subject property determined in their favour. The petitioners/defendants 1st Set cannot therefore claim any right, title or interest in the property. Once the title has been decreed in favour of the plaintiffs/respondents 1st Set and they have prayed for delivery of possession, this Court finds no error in the order of the Executing Court allowing such application, inasmuch as possession is one of
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.42 of 2020 dt.20-02-2020 3/3
the necessary concomitants of ownership and title. The petition is
devoid of merit and is dismissed.
(Vikash Jain, J)
Ibrar//-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | N.A. |
| Uploading Date | 25.02.2020 |
| Transmission Date | N.A. |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Executing Court erred in allowing the application for delivery of possession despite the suit defendants raising objections.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajendra Prasad and others
Jai Kumar Gupta and others
Vikash Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
