defendant and he was paying rent to the plaintiff. When ejectment suit No.136 of 1971 was filed against the first defendant, the first defendant ... Thereafter, the 1st defendant has filed an execution petition in E.A.No.686 of 1980 for execution of sale deed in which, without notice
decree
of ejecting the petitioner from the land in question, except in due course of
law. Respondents were constrained to file an execution application
undertaking,
the landlord also did not pursue the ejectment petition and gave a statement
that ejectment petition may be decided accordingly. Accordingly, the matter ... made on 3.12.2012 and the ejectment petition
was dismissed as withdrawn.
On account of non compliance of undertaking, execution was
filed on 11.12.2015 in which
Aakash Gupta, legal representative of
Ravinder Nath Gupta filed an ejectment petition and the ejectment was
ordered by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade ... some false plea. The aforementioned execution was objected by the
petitioner on the various grounds including the maintainability of execution
application, much less being time
Petitioner-tenant challenges the concurrent findings recorded
by the Courts below whereby ejectment had been ordered from shop
No.47-B, Tagore Nagar, Ludhiana, shown ... execution of the appellate
order, had been filed by the respondent-landlord.
A perusal of the paperbook would go on to show that
ejectment
Track Court-1, Sealdah in Ejectment Appeal No. 1 of
2017, by which an application for stay of the execution proceeding
till the disposal
judgment and decree of
ejectment having attained finality in R.F.A.379/2014,
respondent herein has filed an Execution Petition in
Execution case
tenant in the demised premises. He was ejected by the
competent Court and the order of ejectment was upheld upto
the stage of High Court ... husband who has already
been ejected from the demised premises by the competent
Court and the order of ejectment has been upheld right upto
issued in execution of the certificate, refer the case to the Revenue Officer having jurisdiction who may, in his discretion— (a) eject the defaulting raiyat
process of law. Earlier, the
Defendants had filed a suit for ejectment, which came
to be decreed on 23.06.2014, against which, CRP
No.359/2014 ... Plaintiff failed to comply with the said order, the
Defendants filed Execution Case No.683/2015, wherein,
Rs.50,000/- was refunded to the Plaintiff
