Krishna Bhadoria vs Smt. Geeta Bhadoria
2022 Latest Caselaw 2129 MP

                                      1
             The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                       MP No. 750 of 2022
                  (KRISHNA BHADORIA Vs SMT. GEETA BHADORIA AND OTHERS)

Gwalior, Dated : 16-02-2022
      Shri Karan Virwani, learned counsel for the petitioner.

      Present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is preferred
seeking following relief:-

      "In the aforesaid facts and circumstances it is most humbly
      prayed that the order dated 09.02.2022 passed by the Curt
      below may kindly be set aside and alternatively the execution
      proceedings may kindly be kept in abeyance for 30 days in the
      interest of justice."
      It is a submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that civil suit was
filed by the respondent against the petitioner in the year 2008 in Civil Suit No.17-

A/08, in which judgment and decree has been passed by the trial Court on 30.10.2013. Thereafter, first appeal has been preferred by respondent No.1 vide No.239/14, which also got dismissed vide judgement dated 04.01.2022. Thereafter as per the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, SLP has been preferred, which is pending consideration vide No. 2293/2022 (diary No.4314/2022). Therefore, petitioner preferred an application under Section 151

Cr.P.C. but the same got dismissed vide order dated 09.02.2022. Therefore, this petition has been preferred.

It is a submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that Court below erred in passing the order dated 09.02.2020. He prayed that some more time be given to the petitioner.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This is a case where the petitioner as defendant was contesting the case since 2008 and still possession is distant reality for plaintiff despite having judgment and decree in her favour. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of N.S.S. Narayana Sarma and others Vs. Goldstone Exports (P) Ltd. and others, [(2002) 1 SCC 662] has taken into consideration the plight of decree holder in para 15 and observed that:-

"15. .......................It is a general impression prevailing amongst the litigant public that difficulties of a litigant are by

no means over on his getting a decree for immovable property in his favour. Indeed, his difficulties in real and practical sense, arise after getting the decree. ............."

Court below rightly rejected the application because execution proceeding is going on and it is legitimate right of decree holder to get the fruits of decree after

such long period.

No case for interference is made out. Hence, petition appears to be misconceived and stands dismissed, sans cost.

(ANAND PATHAK) JUDGE

neetu

NEETU SHASHANK 2022.02.22 11:45:43 +05'30'