V. Balasubrahmanyan, J.

1. In this second appeal a nice point arises in the administration of the execution chapter of the Civil Procedure Code. The question is about how adequate Order 21 of the Code could be to tackle a situation which had arisen in this case.

2. The case is one where the decree-holders had obtained a mandatory injunction against their neighbour. The mandatory injunction was to demolish a superstructure in the suit land. The judgment-debtors did not comply with the decree. When the decree-holders proceeded to file an execution petition, the judgment-debtor's mother who had trespassed into the superstructure in the meantime, offered obstruction. The decree-holders filed an application for removal of the obstruction. The executing Court ordered the application and ordered the obstructor Co remove the obstruction, holding that she was a trespasser. She filed a statutory suit for establishing her title to the superstructure. This suit failed in the trial Court and in the first appellate Court. In this second appeal filed by the obstructor her learned Counsel put forward more than one contention. The first was that the Courts below were in error in holding that