Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

judgment dated February 28, 2006, the appeal was allowed thereby setting aside the judgment and decree under appeal and the suit was decreed.

The opposite party no.1 thereafter put the decree in execution, giving rise to Ejectment Execution Case No.168/06. The decree was sought to be executed and the bailiff had been to the decretal premises for delivering possession thereof to the opposite party no.1 but such attempt was allegedly thwarted. Hence, in connection with the said execution case, the opposite party no.1 filed an application under Order 21 Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure only against the opposite party no.2, giving rise to Misc. Case No.259/06. It was alleged in such application that it was the opposite party no.2 who had resisted the Court bailiff to execute the decree for recovery of khas possession passed against the petitioner and thereby, possession of the decretal premises could not be delivered.