P.K. Balasubramanyan, J.

The decree holder is the revision petitioner. He obtained a decree for mandatory injunction directing the judgment debtor to vacate the plaint schedule property and a prohibitory injunction restraining her from entering the property thereafter. The judgment debtor was the wife of the decree holder. According to the decree holder the marriage was dissolved on 19.2.1991 and that aspect is not in dispute at this stage. The decree for mandatory injunction was put in execution by the decree holder. The judgment debtor raised a contention that the decree was void and consequently the executing court could not execute the decree. This contention was overruled by the executing court by its order dated 30.5.1996. But in C.R.P. 1002 of 1996 tiled by the judgment debtor this court set aside the order of the executing court essentially on the ground that the question raised by the judgment debtor had not been properly considered by the executing court and remanded the execution petition to the executing court for reconsideration of the question of want of jurisdiction vitiating the decree raised by the judgment debtor. Thereafter by order dated 17.8.1996 the