Delhi High Court
India Electric Works Ltd. vs Ram Kishan on 1 December, 1995
Equivalent citations: 61 (1996) DLT 479
Author: K Ramamoorthy
Bench: K Ramamoorthy
JUDGMENT
K. Ramamoorthy, J.
(1) On 15.4.1975, a Decree to; possession was passed by this Court. Ea No. 78/95 was filed by the Decree Holder. On 26.2.1995, the possession was delivered to the Decree Holder through Court.
(2) One M/s. Nagpal Express Transport Pvt. Ltd. filed objections in Ea 96/95 claiming the right in the property. His Lordship Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.C. Lohati dismissed the Ea on 10.5.1995.
(3) The Judgment Debtor Shri Ram Kishan filed objections claiming the right in the property in Ea 146/95. Ea 145/95 was filed for condoning the delay in filing objection in Ea 146/95. Tersely stated the objection by Shri Ram Kishan is that Laxmi Devi his wife is the owner of the property and she had filed Suit No. 425/ 94 on the file of Civil Judge (Shri S.K. Sharma, Civil Judge) Delhi against M/s Lica Pvt. Ltd who is the purchaser of the property from the Decree Holder. It is not stated in the petition under what capacity Laxmi Devi was in the possession of the property.
(4) Miscellaneous Application No. 151/95 was filed by M/s Lica Pvt. Ltd on 8.5.1995 for substitution of its name in the proceedings under Section 140 of the Cpc on the ground that they have purchased the property in public auction held by the High Court of Calcutta in 1994 and the sale was confirmed by the Calcutta High Court on 24.4.1995 and that has become final.
(5) Miscellaneous Application No. 165/95 was filed by M/s Lica Pvt. Ltd for police protection as outsiders are trying to interfere with the possession of the Petitioner and it has already been disposed of.
(6) Ea No. 171/95 was filed by Ram Nath Kapoor, General Secretary, Bharat Jaggat Samaj under Section 151 Civil Procedure Code for restoration of the possession of the furniture, fixtures etc and property bearing No. 4/13A, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi in his own right. They have not establishment as to how they came to be in possession of the property and under what right they continued to be in the possession of the property. The Decree Holder has taken possession after evicting all the unauthorised persons. Assuming that Bharat Jagat Samaj had possession of the property, it is wholly unauthorised and such a person cannot claim any right in the property. Under law he was a person bound by the decree and therefore, the Bharat Jagat Samaj is not entitled to file any application. Therefore, the petition is dismissed. It is also barred by law the limitation. The litigation has been going on for a number of years and the Samaj cannot pretend that it was not aware of the suit. Accordingly, E.A. No-171/95 filed by M/s Bharat Jagat Samaj is dismissed.
(7) I shall take up first Miscellaneous Application No. 151/95 filed by M/s. Lica Pvt. Ltd for substitution. The fact that the Lica Pvt. Ltd has purchased the property cannot be disputed. In order to safeguard its interest it has to come on record, therefore. Miscellaneous Application 151/95 is allowed. M/s Lica Pvt. Ltd is directed to be substituted in place of Indian Electric Works Ltd. (Decree Holder).
(8) Smt. Laxmi Devi wife of Sh. Ram Kishan, Judgment Debtor also filed objections. I shall take up the objections filed by Shri Ram Kishan in Ea 146/95 and objections filed by Smt. Laxmi Devi in EA_______/95 (EA has not yet numbered). I have gone through the petitions filed by Shri Ram Kishan and Smt. Laxmi Devi and I do not find any material at all to substantiate their claims. It is obvious that the husband has been set up by the wife and it is stated that the wife is no more and the husband is trying to continue with the proceedings. The Judgment Debtor and his wife cannot re-agitate the matter at this stage and, therefore, the petition filed by Mr. Ram Kishan stands dismissed because he died and petition filed by Mrs. Laxmi Devi (widow) is dismissed on the ground that there is no substance in the petition.
(9) M/S. Lica Pvt. Ltd has filed Miscellaneous Petition No. 165/95 for police protection. M/s. Lica Pvt. Ltd. as per the Decree passed by this Court and as per the sale confirmation order passed by the Calcutta High Court, is entitled to physical possession of the property and, therefore, no person can seek to interfere with the possession of M/s Lica Pvt. Ltd. On the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, I feel that the possession of Lica Pvt. Ltd has to be protected and I direct the Station House Officer of Daryaganj Police Station, New Delhi, to provide all necessary police protection to M/s Lica Pvt. Ltd to have physical possession of the property without any interference from undue elements. The petition is allowed. All the pending applications in this Execution Petition stand disposed of. Execution Petition stands closed. Ea 171/95 dismissed Ea 151/95 allowed. Execution petition allowed.
