Chattisgarh High Court
Paras Lal Verma vs Shanti Verma on 29 September, 2022
-1-
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WP227 No. 609 of 2022
1. Paras Lal Verma (wrongly mentioned as Paras Verma) S/o Late Bharat
Lal Verma, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Risda, Tehsil/District Balodabazar,
District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.
2. Punna Verma @ Annpurna W/o Shivdatt Verma, Aged About 48 Years,
Kosmanda, Tehsil/District Balodabazar, District : Balodabazar-
Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh
3. Beena Verma W/o Late Bharat Lal Verma, Aged About 70 Years, Risda,
Tehsil/District - Balodabazar District : Balodabazar-Bhatapara,
Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner(s)
(Judgment Debtor)
Versus
1. Shanti Verma W/o Late Bhartlal Verma, Aged About 62 Years, Risda,
Tehsil/District - Balodabazar, Present Address - Santmata Ward
Bhatapara, Tehsil - Bhatapara, District - Balodabazar-Bhatapara,
Chhattisgarh.
2. Radhiya Bai Aged About 36 Years, Risda, Tehsil/District - Balodabazar,
Present Address Santmata Ward Bhatapara, Tehsil - Bhatapara,
District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh
3. State Of Chhattisgarh, through the Collector, District : Balodabazar-
Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh
----Respondent(s)
(Decree Holder) For Petitioners - Ms. Supriya Upasane, Advocate. For State - Mr. Sudhir Sahu, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 29-09-2022
1. From the pleading made in the petition it appears that the decree holder has filed execution case before the executing Court, i.e., the Additional Judge to the Court of First Civil Judge, Class II, Balodabazar. On 26-07-2022 the decree holder moved an application for execution of possession warrant through special server, Revenue Inspector and circle Patwari. On that date the presiding officer was on leave, therefore, the case was posted for 16-08-2022. On 16-08-2022 the executing Court, after recording oral objection of the judgment debtor/petitioner, allowed the application moved by the decree holder -2- and observed that if the decree holder pays process fee within three days to serve possession warrant through special server and if special server is available, the possession warrant can be served upon the judgment debtor.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner/judgment debtor submits that no oral objection was made by the petitioner. He has not been offered opportunity to file reply to the application and therefore, the order passed by the learned executing Court dated 16-08-2022 is erroneous and liable to be set aside.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. From the order it appears that the application was moved by the decree holder for issuance of possession warrant through special server, Revenue Inspector and Circle Patwari and on 16-08-2022 after recording oral objection of the judgment debtor the application was allowed and the order sheet has been signed by the petitioner/judgment debtor. Therefore, I do not find any illegality in the order passed by the learned executing Court.
5. Consequently, this petition is dismissed at motion stage itself.
Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Aadil