Smt. Sadhna Jain vs Smt. Geeta Soni
2022 Latest Caselaw 6482 Chatt

                                                                         Page 1 of 2


                                                                               NAFR

              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                             WP227 No. 649 of 2022

  1. Smt. Sadhna Jain, W/o Shri Pradeep Jain, Aged About 60 Years,

  2. Pradeep Jain, S/o Late Panchamlal, Aged About 64 Years,

     Both are R/o Qtr No. E.W.S. 14/12, Bhutal (Kosanagar) P.S.
     Supela, Bhilai Nagar, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

                                                                 ---- Petitioners

                                    Versus

    Smt. Geeta Soni, W/o Shri Purushottam Lal Soni, Aged About 54
     Years, R/o Qtr No. Ews 14/12 Bhutal (Kosanagar), P.S. Supela,
     Bhilai Nagar, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent

For Petitioners : Shri Vivek Bhakta, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 31.10.2022

1) This petition is filed by the petitioners/judgment debtors/defendants against the rejection order of an application filed under Sections 47 read with 151 of the C.P.C.

2) The Civil Suit was filed by the respondent for vacant possession of the suit premises and recovery of arrears of rent. The Civil Suit No. 6430-A/2013 was decreed in favour of the plaintiff/respondent vide judgment and decree dated 21.01.2019. The counter claim of the petitioners/defendants was dismissed, the defendants were directed to hand over the possession of the suit house within the period of 2 months and they were also directed to make payment of arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- per month from March, 2012 till its satisfaction.

3) It appears that execution case was filed by the respondent/decree holder wherein an application under Sections 47 read with 151 of the C.P.C. was moved by the petitioners/defendants, raising certain objections.

4) On 29.06.2022, the learned executing Court dismissed the Execution Proceeding as no one appeared on behalf of the decree holder/respondent.

5) The petitioners have filed the instant petition, challenging the order passed by the learned executing Court on the ground that proper Court Fees has not been paid by the decree holder/respondent, on wrong submissions decree was obtained by him.

6) Taking into consideration that when Execution Proceeding itself has been dismissed for want of prosecution and at present no lis is pending before the Executing Court, this petition has become academic, consequently, same is dismissed at this stage.

Sd/-

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nadim