IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN

th

ON THE 11 OF DECEMBER, 2025 MISC. PETITION No. 7014 of 2025 KANHAIYA LAL KESHWARWANI AND OTHERS Versus RAMDAYAL KESHARWANI DIED THROUGH HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SHIVMOORAT GUPTA Appearance:

Shri Agnivesh Dubey - Advocate for the petitioner.

ORDER The present petitioner has filed this petition seeking direction to carry out the proceedings for handing over and taking over possession by execution of the decree on the same day and same time.

2. A compromise decree has been passed on 20.09.1995 in terms of a Panch Faisla between members of the family dated 03.11.1981. It is the grievance of petitioner that possession of some portion of land is to be handed over by the petitioner to the respondent and possession of some position of land is to be handed over by the respondents to the petitioner. For that purpose two different execution petitions have been filed by both the parties. One is execution No. 2 of 2011 and the other is execution case No. 3 of 2011 pending before the same court and both the execution proceedings are continuing simultaneously.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the executing court passes an order constituting same team to handover and takeover the possession but the teams approach the area on different dates and the parties resist being dispossessed because they do not simultaneously get the possession of the other property on same date and time. For this reason the execution of decree is not taking place. His prayer is that since the possession is to be exchanged between the parties, therefore, the proceedings be held on the same date by the team so that the decree can be effectively executed.

4. This court cannot assess that what is the current situation on the spot because the execution is going on since a long time and the executing Court seems to be best judge of this prayer being made by the petitioner before this court. However, it is clear that the execution proceedings are pending since more than 15 years and have not been concluded till date and only possession between the parties is to be exchanged.

5. The petitioner is directed to move appropriate application before the executing Court praying therein that one team or two different teams as per discretion of the executing court may be constituted but the proceedings for handing over and taking over possession by both the parties should be conducted on the same date so that the execution can be effectively carried out because in absence of receiving vacant position from the other party, the party resists giving possession of its portion.

6. If such an application is filed by the petitioner before the executing Court then the executing Court shall examine that whether passing such a direction would lead to effective execution of the decree so that the long standing litigation and disputes between the parties which stood concluded by way of compromise decree on 20.09.1995 can be finally put to and end.

7. The executing court upon such an application being filed by the petitioner is directed to examine the application and if the prayer is found to be feasible then to pass necessary orders to ensure effective execution of the degree. It is made clear that this Court has not stayed the execution of decree in the meantime.

8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition is disposed of. (VIVEK JAIN)

JUDGE