SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(Raj) 1055

SHIV KUMAR SHARMA
Mohd. Idaris – Appellant
Versus
Abdul Hai – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Objector Petitioner:M.M. Ranjan, Advocate.
For the Decree Holder:Rajendra Prasad, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - Instant revision has been filed against the order dated 9.9.1997 of the executing court whereby objections of the petitioner preferred under Section 47 read with Order 21 Rule 97, Civil Procedure Code were dismissed.

2. In view of Order 21 Rule 103, Civil Procedure Code the impugned order amounts to a decree therefore I propose to deal with the instant petition treating it as appeal.

3. Admittedly the decree dated 13.5.1997 was passed in favour of the decree holder in a suit instituted under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act 1963. The decree holder sought execution of the said decree by filing execution petition seeking restoration of possession of the shop from where he was dispossessed on 17.9.1990 by the judgment debtor without due process of law.

4. Before the executing court the petitioner submitted objection petition with the averments that the title of the shop vests in Mst. Fatima Begum who had purchased the property through registered deed dated 14.10.1981 from Smt. Gopali Devi Jhalani. The petitioner was inducted tenant by Mst. Fatima Begum w.e.f. 1.6.1994. Mst. Fatima Begum thereafter sold the property to Abdul Hafiz and Abdul Rashid through registered sale











Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top