Learned counsel for the judgment debtor submits that the plaintiff decree-holder respondent No.1-Ghanshyam Bihari Gupta( for short ‘the decree-holder’) had filed a suit for partition and permanent injunction, which was decreed by the trial court vide judgment dated 13.02.1995 as per Will dated 29.10.1987 (Ex.A-1). The said Will was directed to be treated as a part of the decree and decree-holder was held entitled to get partitioned his share and to obtain possession thereof. Learned counsel for the judgment debtor further submits that the decree holder filed an execution petition before the executing court in which summons were issued to the judgment debtor. In execution petition, the decree holder stated that actual physical possession of Latrine & Bathroom marked as ABCD and Room marked as EFGH be handed over to him and construction so raised marked as IJKL and MNOP be removed and possession be handed over. Learned counsel for the judgment-debtor submits that the judgment-debtor had filed objections regarding execution but said objections were dismissed by the executing court vide order dated 10.04.2000. In objections, the petitioner stated that the decree dated 13.02.1995 passed by the Court below is not a final decree. It is a preliminary decree and in decree it was no where mentioned that decree-holder was entitled to get possession of the Latrine & Bathroom marked as ABCD and Room marked as EFGH and removal of construction so raised and marked as IJKL and MNOP. So, executing court while rejecting the objections filed by the judgment debtor clearly observed that in decree, there was no order to hand over
