Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: ejectment execution in Mrs K Thankam vs Mr Melville D Sa on 5 March, 2020Matching Fragments
5. When the appeal was listed for admission, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the possession of the suit premises was recovered from the defendants in Execution Petition No.77/2011 on the file of II Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mangaluru, in terms of the delivery warrant dated 02.12.2011. It is stated that therefore this Regular Second Appeal would not survive for consideration.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the appellants would contend that the plaintiff had executed an agreement of sale of the suit premises to the defendants and therefore, the execution of the judgment and decree of ejectment by the plaintiff would be inconsequential and that the appeal cannot be dismissed at its threshold. It is seen from Ex.P7 agreement of sale, which was executed by the plaintiff in favour of the defendants that the possession of the suit premises was not delivered to the defendants.