1. The instant petition is against the order dated 12.02.2018 whereby an application under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC preferred by the decree holder was allowed. It was further directed that the possession of the disputed suit property as per the order dated 20.12.2002 be given to the decree holder in a result the objection raised by the petitioner against execution of decree was dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that a decree for ejectment was granted in a civil Suit No. 20-A/2002 in respect of the suit property wherein the petitioner was in possession. It is contended that petitioners were not made a party in the said suit and the decree for possession was obtained by the respondent Chandrabhan Kriplani by suppression of fact. He would further submit that when the resistance was made in the execution of decree and subsequently an application preferred under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC was preferred by the decree holder, the executing Court without any sufficient reason has allowed the application and ordered dispossession of the petitioner. He would further submit that the petitioner is in possession of the suit property since more than 30 years back and thei