Court No. - 58
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3214 of 2019 Petitioner :- Vishwanath And 3 Others Respondent :- Smt. Savita Ruiya And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Rai
Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the petitioners.
The present petition seeks a direction to the Additional Small Causes Court, Kanpur Nagar not to proceed with the Execution Case No. 16 of 2015 and the Execution Case No. 17 of 2015 which is said to be pending for execution of the judgment and decree passed in SCC Suit No. 525 of 1987.
It is admitted position that Suit No. 525/1987 (Smt. Savita Ruiya and another Vs. Kailash Nath Gupta and others) which had been filed for possession of bhandariya and duchhati and also for arrears of rent in respect of the premises in question was partly allowed vide judgment dated 31.5.2014 to the extent of the relief sought for possession of bhandariya and arrears of rent and so far as the relief sought for possession of duchhati, the suit was dismissed. The plaintiffs, Smt. Savita Ruiya and Smt. Prem Lata filed a revision being Revision No.74 of 2014 insofar as the suit had been dismissed in respect of the relief sought for possession of duchhati and the revision is said to be pending. The petitioners herein who were arrayed as defendants in the suit admittedly did not raise any challenge to the judgment dated 31.5.2014 insofar as the suit had been decreed with regard to bhandariya and arrears of rent. The Execution Case No. 16/2015 was filed in respect of the decree for recovery of rent. The Execution Case No. 17/2015 was filed with regard to the possession of bhandariya. Both the execution cases were filed on 11.12.2014.
The defendants in the suit i.e. petitioners herein having not raised any challenge to the judgment dated 31.5.2014 whereby the suit had been partly allowed, mere pendency of the revision filed by the plaintiffs insofar as it relates to their grievances in respect of the suit having been partly dismissed, the petitioners cannot raise a claim that the execution proceedings pursuant to the decree dated 31.5.2014 may not proceed.
Counsel for the petitioners has not been able to point out any cogent ground in terms of which the executing court may be directed not to proceed with the execution case.
The petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 Pratima (Dr.Y.K.Srivastava,J.)