(1) HAVING heard learned Senior Counsel for the parties, in our view, from the impugned judgment two points arise for our consideration:

(i) Whether the application under Section 4 of the Partition Act, 1893 was maintainable at the execution stage? (ii) Even if it is maintainable, whether Section 4 of its own even applies to the facts of the present case and whether the property in question was a dwelling house belonging to an undivided family as laid down in that section?

(2) SO far as the first point is concerned, the High Court by its impugned judgment has held that the application was maintainable even at the execution stage. That decision of the High Court is fully governed by a decision of this Court in Ghantesher Ghosh v. Madan Mohan Ghosh wherein this Court has taken a view that Section 4 of the Partition Act can be pressed into service even at execution stage after the final decree in partition suit is passed. Consequently, the view taken by the High Court on this point remains well sustained.

(3) THAT takes us to the consideration of the second point. So far as this point is concerned, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, Mr Mishra veheme