JUDGMENT :- This review application has been filed against the judgment delivered in Civil Revision Application No. 115 of 2006 by this court. The parties hereinafter shall be referred to as decree-holder and judgment-debtor.

2. The present applicant in review application is a decree-holder while the non-applicant is ajudgment-debtor. Non-applicant judgment debtor had filed Civil Revision Application No. 115 of 2006 before this court.

The said revision application came to be allowed.

The present applicant/decree-holder seeks to review that judgment in view of the fact that decree-holder was not heard. It is contended that the matter was not actually notified in the list for hearing and therefore the decree-holder's counsel could not remain present before the court and place the proper position of law before the court.

3. The facts may be narrated as follows Decree-holder Radhabai had instituted Civil Suit No.955 of 1971. There was a compromise and a compromise decree was passed on 28-2-1974. The decree was for delivery of possession and recovery of money.

Initially, two execution applications were filed - one Regular Darkhast No.280 of 1974 and second R.D. No.131 of 1976. The first appl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document