ORDER :

Heard

1. The present petition has been brought by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by the orders dated 11.9.2020 and 23.9.2020 passed by the Learned Third Additional District Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur in Civil Execution Case No. 7 of 2016.

2. Respondents No.1 to 3 have a judgment and decree in their favour dated 31.1.1986 in Civil Suit No.11-A of 1982. The plaintiffs were declared as titleholders of the suit land, property of plot No.106/1 measuring area 1903 sq.ft. and the construction standing on the same. The sale deed that was executed by defendants No.1 to 6 in favour of defendant No.7 dated 17.2.1982 was declared void and delivery of possession was ordered in favour of the plaintiff. This judgment was challenged in First Appeal No. 42 of 1986 before the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which was renumbered as First Appeal No. 103 of 2010, has been dismissed for non-prosecution and M.C.C. No. 892 of 2014 filed for restoration has also been dismissed vide order dated 4.12.2018. Subsequent to that, Civil Suit No.4-A of 2014 was instituted by Premlal Halwai against Smt. Leelawati Dandwani and this petitioner, which has been decided by the judgment dated 21.1.2015, by which the sale deeds dated 18.1.2001 and 25.1.2001 executed by Smt. Leelawati Dandwani in favour of this petitioner have been declared null and void and the order has been passed against the petitioner/ defendant No.2 to deliver possession of the suit property to the heirs of Gendlal who are respondents No.1 to 3.

3. First Appeal No.142 of 2015 has been preferred against the aforesaid judgment and decree, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 21.6.2019. In the meanwhile, the execution proceeding that was initiated by respondents No.1 to 3 which is registered as Execution Case No. 7 of 2016 is pending. Respondents No. 1 to 3 have filed W.P. (227) No. 199 of 2020, which has been disposed of by order dated 19.2.2020 with a direction to the Executing Court to conclude the execution proceedings within a time-frame of six months.

4. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has filed a Civil Suit No.4-A of 2020, copy of plaint is Annexure-P/13 praying for relief of declaration of his title over the suit property mentioned hereinabove and permanent injunction. A declaration has also been sought that the judgment and decree in Civil Suit No.4-A of 2014 dated 21.1.2015 is not executable. It is further submitted that respondents No.1 to 3 have obtained an order in W.P.(227) No. 199 of 2020 from this Court by suppressing the fact, that there is a civil suit pending with respect to the suit property. The petitioner then filed an application under Order XXI Rule 29 of the CPC praying for stay in the execution proceeding on the basis of the pendency of the civil suit filed by him with respect to the same suit property which has been erroneously dismissed by the Execution Court. The petitioner then filed an application under Section 47 read with Section 151 and Order XXI Rule 101 of the CPC, which has been decided and rejected by the impugned order dated 23.9.2020. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the order passed is erroneous and also submits that there is a question of executability of the decree present.

5. Reliance has been placed on the judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of Sabitri Dei and Others vs. Sarat Chandra Rout and Others, reported in 1996 SCC (3) 301 and Seth Hiralal Patni vs. Sri Kali Nath, reported in 1962 AIR 199. it is submitted that this Court has made observations in the order dated 15.10.2020 passed in this petition on the maintainability of the present writ petition, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for grant of relief as prayed.

6. Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 3 submits that there is clear judgment and decree in their favour granted in Civil Suit No. 4-A of 2014 which has been confirmed by the High Court in First Appeal No. 142 of 2015