IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KHOT

rd

ON THE 23 OF JANUARY, 2026 MISC. CIVIL CASE No. 167 of 2026 JANKI JEEVAN SHARAN RICHARIYA DEAD THROUGH LRS SIDDHANT RICHARIYA AND OTHERS Versus NISHA RICHHARIYA AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Ashok Lalwani - Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Yashraj Patel -

Advocate for the petitioners.

ORDER The present application has been filed by the applicants under Section

151 read with Order 39 Rule 2-A of the Code of Civil Procedure for the following relief:-

It is therefore prayed that the Hon'ble Court be pleased to initiate proceedings under Order 39 Rule 2-A of CPC as pleaded above against the non-applicants for not obeying their undertaking vide order dated 03.03.2025 passed in MP No. 5852/2024.

2. It is the contention of the learned senior counsel that earlier a suit was filed for declaring registered joint ownership deed dated 27.08.2004 as null and void. The said suit was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 20.12.2008 (Annexure A/1). Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the petitioners/plaintiffs had filed a regular first appeal, which was dismissed vide judgment dated 25.08.2015, but, on review been filed, it was termed as disposed of. In the said judgment, there was certain clarifications, which have been observed by this Court. Thereafter, the petitioners again filed a suit vide RCSA No. 3600123/2016 for partition, permanent injunction and mandatory injunction. The said suit was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 20.12.2023 (Annexure A/3). The Civil Court has declared the subject matter of the suit as a joint undivided property of the petitioners/plaintiffs and respondents/defendants. It has further been declared that some properties are of 1/3rd ownership of share holders. Thereafter, the respondent had filed an execution proceeding before the Executing Court, which was registered as ExA-12/2024. In the said execution proceeding, an application under Order 21 Rule 11 of CPC has been filed. In the said application, in Row Nos. G and I-i, the respondents had mentioned the details of the judgment and decree of the earlier suit and accordingly, the Executing Court had issued possession warrants. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 18.09.2024, the applicants had preferred MP No. 5852/2025, which was disposed of vide order dated 03.03.2025 on the undertaking tendered by respondents. According to the undertaking, counsel for the respondents had accepted the mistake in the execution application while writing details in respect of the judgment and decree dated 20.12.2023 and other details for which assurance was given that same shall be amended before the Executing Court within 10 days. Relying on the said undertaking, the order impugned by which the possession has been directed in the execution proceeding has been set aside and the Executing Court was directed to execute the judgment and decree dated 20.12.2023 passed in RCSA No. 3600123/2016 in its letter and spirit.

3 . It is the case of the applicants that despite of the undertaking tendered before the Court in miscellaneous petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the amendment application before the Executing Court for correcting the details of the application in regard to judgment and decree passed by the Court has not been done. It is further submitted that the judgment and decree, which was directed to be executed by the Writ Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, has been later on stayed in another first appeal, but despite of the undertaking, the respondents have not corrected the application before the Executing Court and as such breached the undertaking, which will amount to breach of injunction as provided under Order 39 Rule 2-A of CPC. Accordingly, the present application has been filed to initiate the proceeding against the respondents under Order 39 Rule

2-A of CPC.

4. It has been contended by the learned senior counsel that whe