1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Arpit Agarwal, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 1 and perused the record.

2. Present revision has been filed challenging the impugned judgment and decree dated 23.5.2018 passed by the Special Judge (E.C.Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Pilibhit in Misc. Case No. 03 of 2016 (Haji Kunni Khan vs. Kapil Agrawal and anohter) arising out of SCC Execution Case No. 5 of 2015 (Kapil Agrawal vs. Arvind Singh).

3. By the impugned order, the application filed by the petitioner herein under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC has been rejected by the Court below on the ground that till date no amin parwana has been issued and as such, there is no report regarding obstruction in delivery of possession and as such, the application filed by the present revisionist is not maintainable. It has been noticed that till date no amin report has come as yet.

4. Submission of the learned counsel for the revisionist is that a third party, who is in possession, is also entitled to move such application even before his dispossession and the law is clear on this issue and therefore, rejection of application filed by the revisionist under Order 21 Rule 97 CP