Section 74 of the CPC is not applicable after possession of immovable property has been delivered to the decree-holder.

ORDER :

This revision under Section 115 of the CPC has been preferred by the petitioners/decree holders being aggrieved by the order dated 15.04.2024 passed by the executing Court whereby their application under Section 74 of the CPC has been rejected.

2. The petitioners had filed a suit against the respondents for possession of the suit land. The same was decreed by judgment and decree dated 10.01.2021 directing delivery of possession of the suit land in their favour.

3. Thereafter the decree was put to execution by the petitioners in which on 01.02.2024 possession of the suit land was delivered in their favour by the revenue authorities by explaining the boundaries of the suit land to them. Possession of the crops standing over the suit land was also delivered in their favour. The executing Court thereafter recorded its satisfaction that possession of the suit land has been delivered to the petitioners.

4. Thereafter an application under Section 74 of the CPC was preferred by the petitioners before the executing Court submitting that subsequent to delivery of possession of the suit land in their favour the respondents have cut the crops sown over the suit land. The same has resulted in their dispossession hence the respondents be detained in civil prison and possession of the suit land be redelivered to them. The application has been rejected by the executing Court on the ground that since possession of the suit land has already been delivered to the petitioners, the provision of Section 74 of the CPC would not be attracted.

5. Section 74 of the CPC reads as under :

"74 Resistance to execution: - Where the Court is satisfied that the holder of a decree for the possession of immovable property or that the purchaser of immovable property sold in execution of a decree has been resisted or obstructed in obtaining possession of the property by the judgment-debtor or some person on his behalf and that such resistance or obstruction was without any just cause, the Court may, at the instance of the decree-holder or purchaser, order the judgment-debtor or such other person to be detained in the civil prison for a term which may extend to thirty days and may further direct that the decree-holder or purchaser be put into possession of the property."

6. The aforesaid provision gets attracted only where holder of a decree for possession of immovable property is resisted or obstructed in obtaining possession of the property by the judgment debtor without any just cause . The provision relates to the period where the decree is being sought to be executed and possession is being attempted to be delivered to the decree holder, but is resisted or obstructed to by the judgment debtor. For ensuring delivery of possession, the judgment debtor can be directed to be detained in a civil prison. The provision remains in operation till possession of the immovable property is delivered to the decree holder and once possession is obtained by him the same ceases to operate thereafter.

7. In the present case, in execution of the decree, the petitioners have already been put in possession of the suit land by the revenue authorities and which delivery of possession has been accepted and satisfaction recorded by the executing Court. The grievance of the petitioners is that subsequent thereto the respondents have interfered with their possession over the suit land. For this subsequent act of the respondents, the remedy of the petitioners is elsewhere and not by filing an application under Section 74 of the CPC since that stage had already been crossed as possession of the suit land has been delivered. Since Section 74 of the CPC was not applicable to the facts of the case, where possession had already been delivered to the petitioners, the executing Court has not committed any error in rejecting the application under Section 74 of the CPC preferred by the petitioners.

8. Thus no illegality is found to have been committed by the executing Court in passing the impugne