JUDGMENT :

SANJAY PRASAD, J.

The instant Civil Revision has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the order dated 01.04.2026 passed in Execution Case No. 192 of 2023, arising out of Title Suit No. 70 of 2005, by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division-IV), Jamshedpur, by which petition dated 13.10.2023 under Section 151 C.P.C., filed by the petitioner seeking dismissal of the said Execution Case, has been dismissed as not maintainable and the petitioner has prayed for dismissal of the above Execution Case No. 192 of 2023 on the ground of res-judicata, inexecutability of the decree, contravention of the order of the High Court and suppression of material facts.

2. The case of the original plaintiff-namely Kedar Prasad (Husband of O.P. No.1 and father of O.P. No.s 2 and 3)-Decree Holder, in brief, is that he entered into an agreement for sale of the suit property with Smt. Bachhi Devi. When Smt. Bachhi Devi allegedly refused to honour the said agreement, Kedar Prasad instituted Title Suit No. 70 of 2005 before the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)-II, Singhbhum East, Jamshedpur, praying for a decree of specific performance of the agreement of sale. The said suit was contested and was ultimately decreed in favour of Kedar Prasad vide judgment and decree dated 16.01.2015.

The operative portion of the decree is significant and reads as follows: "that the suit be and the same is hereby decreed in favour of the plaintiff and the plaintiff is directed to pay Rs. 40,00,000/- (Forty Lacs) (Rs. 30,00,000/- + Rs. 10,00,000/-) to the defendant no. 1 within 60 days of this order in two equal instalment of Rs. 20,00,000/-, i.e. 1st installment to be paid within 30 days and second installment to be paid within 30 days; receipt only acknowledged by the defendant no.1; and the defendant no. 1 is directed to execute a registered sale deed on cost of the plaintiff within 30 days next following the payment of second instalment; and then defendants to handover the vacant possession of the suit land to the plaintiff; failing which the plaintiff will be at liberty to take recourse of law."

In furtherance of the said decree, Kedar Prasad filed Execution Case No. 11 of 2015 before the Executing Trial Court for levy of execution of the decree against Smt. Bacchi Devi. In the interregnum, it came to light that Smt. Bacchi Devi had already alienated the suit property in favour of the Petitioner- Hare Ram Singh by means of two registered Sale Deeds, being Sale Deed No. 4256 dated 02.08.2006 and Sale Deed No. 7208 dated 22.09.2007.

3. The case of the Objector-petitioner- judgment debtor, in brief, is that he had purchased the suit property from its owner Bachhi Devi by means of two registered Sale Deeds, being Sale Deed No. 4256 dated 02.08.2006 by paying an amount of Rs.17,30,000/- (Rupees Seventeen lac thirty thousand) (20.54 Katha land) and Sale Deed No. 7208 dated 22.09.2007 for amount of Rs.24,95,000/-(39.00 Katha).

4. The further case of the Objector- petitioner-judgment debtor No.1 is that when the petitioner-Judgment Debtor No-1 Hareram Singh came to learn about the decree passed in Title Suit No. 70/2005 as well as about Execution Case No.11/2015 filed to execute the said decree, then the petitioner filed an application under Order 21 Rule 97 of CPC, registered as Misc Case No. 21 of 2015 before the Executing Court i.e. before the court of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Jamshedpur praying for appropriate reliefs including an order of determination of his objection, order to protect his possession as well as for an order setting aside the judgment and decree passed in aforementioned suit i.e. Title Suit No. 70/2005.

The Learned Court, after adjudication of the objection of objector Hareram Singh (petitioner herein), allowed his application filed under Order XXI Rule 97 of CPC vide order dated 23.12.2022 and ordered as follows:-

"Misc Case is hereby allowed with order that the decree dated 28.01.2015 passed in the Title Suit 70