JUDGMENT

More than one and a half centuries ago, the Privy Council, Raj Durbhunga v. Maharajah Coomar Ramaput Sing (1872) SCC OnLine PC 16 observed that - “the difficulties of a litigant in India begin when he has obtained a decree”. This case is a live illustration of the said observation. A decree obtained in the year 2000, in a suit instituted in the year 1996, still remains unexecuted – without even settling the issue regarding the forum to execute it.

2. The petitioners are decree holders 7 to 12, 14 and 15 in EP No.23/2019 in OS No.403/1996 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Kothamangalam (for short, the Executing Court). The other decree holders, except the 13^th decree-holder, are no more. The 13^th decree holder has been arrayed as respondent No.15 as he is out of station. The respondent Nos.1 to 13 are the judgment debtors 3, 4, 6 to 8 and 10 to 17. The other judgment debtors are no more.

3. The suit was one for declaration, permanent prohibitory injunction and recovery of possession. The subject matter of the suit was a mosque known as Kuttilanji Muslim Mosque, established by the ancestors of the petitioners/plaintiffs. It is admittedly waqf property registered with the K