Back
K. SURENDER
Telangana Dairy Development Co-operative Federation Limited – Appellant
Versus
Harbanslal Bhanote (died) – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 13.11.2009 passed in E.P.No.36 of 1993 in O.S.No.852 of 1978 on the file of X Additional Senior Civil Judge( FTC), City Civil Court, Court.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondents and also perused the written arguments filed by both.
3. The suit was initially filed by Mr.Harbanslal Bhanote as plaintiff. After his death, his wife Smt.Mathura Devi was impleaded as plaintiff. Thereafter, Smt.Kanta Rani was impleaded as plaintiff since Smt.Mathura Devi also died. The name of The Telangana State Dairy Development Co-operative Federation Limited was impleaded in the place of A.P.Dairy Development Co-operative Federation Limited vide orders in I.A.No.1 of 2021 dated 16.09.2021. The said Telangana State Dairy Development Co-operative Federation Limited is third defendant in the suit and also the Execution Petition.
4. The back ground of the case leading to filing of the present petition by petitioner herein, who is respondent No.3 in the suit is that in the year 1961, the Government (R5 herein and defendant in the suit) acquired the land of Mr.Harbhanslal Bhan
A consent judgment is binding, preventing parties from challenging execution orders if they previously agreed to the terms, even if property boundaries are unclear.
The executing court cannot go beyond the decree and must respect prior adjudications regarding entitlement to compensation, as established by the doctrine of merger.
Execution of decree – Review of judgment – Validity of - Judgment of Court is based has been reversed or modified by subsequent decision of a superior Court in any other case, shall not be a ground f....
The executing court cannot go beyond the terms of the decree and must interpret the decree in a manner that gives true effect to it. It cannot draw a new decree and must strike a balance while giving....
Executing Court cannot dismiss execution case on technical grounds.
Rule 35 of Order 21 deals with modes of executing a decree for possession of immovable properties.
The court upheld that concurrent findings of fact by lower courts should not be disturbed unless proven perverse, reinforcing the principle that claims related to property must be initiated within th....
The Executing Court must execute decrees as per their terms without questioning merits or introducing new factual disputes.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
