Order on Board

06/05/2026

1. This is a writ petition filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India claiming the following reliefs:-

“10.1. This Hon'ble High Court may please to issue a Stay order of further hearing in the Civil exe. case 01/2017 in the lower court of First A.D.J Rajnandgaon (C.G.). As well as the entire records of the case be requisitioned by the Honorable Court from the lower court.

10.2. This Hon'ble High Court may please to issue writ of certiorari and set aside all the order which are passed by the lower court (As per Annexure P/1).

10.3. This Honorable High Court may give Such other appropriate orders deem fit to grant in favor of the Petitioner.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are owner of the land of total area of 3.962 hectares of total 7 different Khasra numbers situated at village Baghera, R.I. Circle Ghumka, Tahsil and District Rajnandgaon, they inherited the said land from the husband of petitioner No.1 and father of petitioner No.2 and 3, namely Biranchi Toppo. Earlier the respondent filed a civil suit No. 12-A/2016 against Biranchi Toppo for specific performance of the contract dated 16.12.2013 in which a compromise was arrived at between the parties and the said civil suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs by Mega Lok Adalat, Bench No.5, Rajnandgaon on 14.05.2016 on the basis of the compromise. As per the compromise and decree passed by Mega Lok Adalat on 14.05.2016, a decree for execution and registration of the sale deed within 6 months from 14.05.2016 was passed after payment of remaining sale consideration of Rs.2,80,000/-. Based on the said compromise decree, the respondent is prosecuting an execution application before the learned Executing Court. He would further submit that Biranchi Toppo had challenged the compromise decree dated 14.05.2016, passed by Mega Lok Adalat in WP(227) No. 617 of 2017, in which the interim order of stay of further execution proceeding was passed. The said writ petition was dismissed by coordinate Bench of this Court on 29.08.2023.

3. During the pendency of the execution proceeding, Biranchi Toppo has died. After death of Biranchi Toppo, judgment debtor, the present petitioners have made an objection under Order 21 Rule 58 of the CPC on 05.03.2024, raising their grievance that a decree has been obtained by the decree holder by concealing the material facts and keeping Biranchi Toppo under the influence of liquor. The petitioners are also title and possession holder of the subject land and Biranchi Toppo cannot give his consent for execution of sale deed for entire land. There are manipulations in the agreement and without considering the entitlement of the land owner, alienable title and the entitlement of other shareholder of the property, the decree has been passed on the basis of compromise between the parties. The said application filed by the petitioners under Order 21 Rule 58 of CPC has been rejected by the learned Executing Court on 12.03.2026, along with the other applications filed by the petitioners, i.e. the application under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act and application under Section 151 of CPC.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would also submit that the entire execution proceeding suffers from jurisdictional error and cannot continued as the decree itself is obtained on incorrect facts. The petitioners are legal heirs of the deceased defendant Biranchi Toppo and the decree passed on the basis of consent given by Biranchi Toppo cannot be executed against his LRs. He would also submit that the decree can be executed only to the extent of share of the deceased Biranchi Toppo. However, it cannot be executed beyond his share and first it has to be ascertained what was the share of Biranchi Toppo, which he was entitled to alienate the same. Therefore, the petitioners are not challenging any particular order but are challenging the entire execution proceed