An ex parte decree is valid and binding; police aid can be granted to enforce it even without prior notice to the opposing party.

ORDER :

This Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’) seeking for setting aside the order dated 05.09.2024 passed by the Additional Junior Civil Judge at Deverakonda in E.A. No. 01 of 2024 in the E.P. No.11 of 2024 in O.S. No.345 of 2022.

2. The revision petitioners are the respondents in the E.P and the defendants in the suit.

3. The respondent herein as the plaintiff had instituted the underlying suit vide O.S. No.345 of 2022 for grant of perpetual injunction against the revision petitioners herein as defendants.

4. The suit filed by the respondent herein was decreed by the trial Court on 29.12.2022. The revision petitioners remained exparte in the aforesaid suit filed by the respondent herein.

5. The respondent herein thereafter filed Execution Petition (EP) under Order XXI Rule 11, 37 and 38 of CPC seeking execution of the decree issued in the suit vide O.S. No.345 of 2022, whereby an order of perpetual injunction restraining the revision petitioners herein, their agents, henchmen, legal heirs etc. from causing interference with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the respondent herein as plaintiff in respect of the suit schedule property was passed.

6. The respondent herein in the Execution Petition filed by him before the trial Court had pleaded that in spite of the trial Court passing decree granting perpetual injunction in his favour, the revision petitioners were intentionally obstructing him from entering into the suit schedule; that on 02.07.2024 and 03.07.2024 when the revision petitioners interfered with his peaceful possession of the suit schedule property, he had lodged a complaint before the concerned police authorities on 03.07.2024 to take action against the revision petitioner in a Writ Petition; and that the police did not take any action on claiming that the dispute is civil in nature by making an endorsement to the above fact.

7. It is the further case of the respondent herein that the revision petitioners are continuing to interfere and obstruct him from undertaking agriculture works in the suit land even though he had obtained an order of injunction from the Hon'ble Court and thus, sought for putting the revision petitioner in civil imprisonment for enforcement of the decree.

8. The respondent herein along with the aforesaid Execution Petition, filed in interlocutory application therein seeking for providing police aid to enable him to enjoy the fruits of the decree passed by the Hon'ble Court in O.S. No.345 of 2022 pending E.P.

9. The trial Court by considering the interlocutory application filed in the Execution Petition had by its order dt. 05.09.2024 directed the police/Station House Officer, Marriguda to provide necessary police aid to the respondent herein till the disposal of Execution Petition.

10. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the executing Court in granting police aid, the revision petitioners are before this Court.

11. Heard learned Counsel for the revision petitioners and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent and perused the record.

12. On behalf of the revision petitioners it is contended that the Court below had erred in passing the order directing to provide police aid to the respondent herein till the disposal of Execution Petition without issuing notice to them in the E.P; that the revision petitioners have undertaken cultivation operation in the suit schedule property which was the subject matter of Execution Petition; that the respondent herein taking advantage of the order dt. 05.09.2024 passed in the E.A. in E.P. is preventing them from carrying on with the agriculture operation; that a standing crop is existing on the subject land at present; that due to passing of an exparte order providing police aid, the revision petitioners are being deprived/ prevented from entering into their fields; and that the trial Court could not have passed such an order without taking into consideration the above facts.

13. Revisi