Back
JAY SENGUPTA
Avijit Mallick – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
JAY SENGUPTA, J.
1. This is an application alleging police inaction in executing a decree of a Civil Court.
2. Affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no. 5 is taken on record.
3. Affidavit-in-reply filed by the petitioners is also taken on record.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits as follows. A Civil Court passed a decree in favour of the petitioners on 30.03.2017. An appeal preferred by the defendants was dismissed on 30.11.2021. Even a second appeal was dismissed for default. On 06.12.2022, the Civil Court was pleased to allow police help for execution of the decree after a contested hearing. The bailiff along with police force went to execute the decree. On the first occasion, they were prevented by a huge mob of at least 200 to 250 persons. The bailiff accordingly gave a report dated 09.01.2023. On the second effort of the bailiff was also resisted by not only the judgment-debtor, but also his learned advocates who gathered people to prevent execution. Only a small portion of the scheduled property was handed over. The rest was forcibly withheld. The decree thus could only be partially executed. Accordingly, the bailiff filed a rep
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the decree holder should not be required to bear the expenses for police help in enforcing a court decree, in the absence of a specific leg....
Article 227 empowers High Court to direct police aid for execution despite technical impleadment bars.
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
