Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: ejectment execution in Parminder Singh vs Maninder Singh on 11 March, 2015Matching Fragments
4. Since the tenant did not vacate the demised premises by the stipulated date, so the landlord was left with no other option except to file the execution application before the trial Court. On receiving this execution application, the learned Executing Court issued notice to JD for 02.05.2015 vide the impugned order.
5. The main grievance of the present petitioner in the nutshell is that as per the provisions of Order 21 Rule 22 of CPC, the Executing Court was legally bound to issue warrant of possession for delivery of possession of demised booth to the decree holder instead of the simple notice. In this connection it is also the case of the petitioner that the ejectment order in this case is dated 28.11.2014 and the instant execution on its basis was filed on 07.02.2015, i.e. within 2 years of this order. The petitioner is stated to be 65 years old and a retiree. Further at the time of arguments learned counsel for the petitioner has also cited a case law as laid down in C.Raghunatha Reddy vs. S.Rajasekaran, 2011(5) CTC 837 (Madras High Court).