Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Arun Kumar Jha
Ajay Kumar Son of Late Prem Chand Prasad Kashyap @ Prem Chndra Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Devidin Prasad son of late Antu Sah @ Antu Ram – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Arun Kumar Jha, J.
Record taken up on mentioning being made on behalf of the petitioner and I intend to dispose of the petition at the stage of admission itself.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned senior counsel for the respondents.
3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 29.08.2024 passed by learned Munsif 1st, Sasaram, Rohtas in Execution Case No. 06 of 2011 arising out of Eviction Suit No. 03 of 1998, whereby and whereunder the petition dated 13.03.2020 filed by the petitioner under Order 21 Rule 29 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter ‘the Code’) was rejected.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the eviction suit it was the case of the plaintiffs/respondents that the defendant/petitioner was tenant of one Ramji Prasad Sahu from whom the plaintiff have purchased the property in question through registered sale deed dated 15.03.1996 for consideration amount of Rs.4,00,000/- (Four lakhs) and in this manner the defendant became his tenant. The defendant appeared and contested the suit claiming that the sale deed executed in favour of the plaintiffs was illegal transaction. Issues were frame
The court affirmed that prior judicial decisions addressed all claims raised by the petitioner, thus ruling that there were no grounds to stay execution proceedings under Article 227.
Stay of execution proceeding – Judgment and decree obtained by sole respondent in Eviction Suit cannot be denied on the ground of pendency of partition suit which is not pursued by petitioner.
Execution of joint decrees remains valid even with subsequent transfers of interest by decree-holders, and a judgment-debtor cannot escape execution by claiming ownership.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the narrow power of the court under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which limits objections to a decree only on the ground of it bein....
The interpretation of a stay order in execution proceedings can lead to ambiguity, warranting clarification by a higher bench.
The court affirmed that mere interest in property does not grant standing to object in execution proceedings if title has been conclusively determined.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
