1. There is neither any merit nor bona fides in the contentions advanced by the revision petitioner in this case.

2. O. S. No. 20 of 1951 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Palghat was a suit instituted by the Ist respondent heroin against the 2nd respondent for partition and recovery of possession of a half share in the plaint schedule properties which were admittedly owned in common by respondents 1 and 2. That suit which was instituted on 9-2-1951 resulted in a preliminary decree for partition rendered on 31-3-1952. Subsequently, a final decree was also passed allotting specific portions of the properties towards the half share claimed by the Ist respondent-plaintiff. When proceedings for delivery of possession in execution of that decree were initiated by the Ist respondent, the revision petitioner offered obstruction to the delivery contending that he had a leasehold right in respect of the property allotted to the plaintiff Ist respondent by virtue of an oral lease granted in his favour by the 2nd respondent on 6-2-1951 and a subsequent registered lease deed dated 20-6-1951 executed by the 2nd respondent. Since the order passed by the executing court on