Kishore Chandra Dash vs Narayan Prasad Satpathy And
2022 Latest Caselaw 959 Ori

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                  CMP No.460 Of 2018
                            (Through video conferencing mode)

            Kishore Chandra Dash                    ...                Petitioner

                                                        Mr. K.K.Jena, Advocate
                                         -versus-

            Narayan Prasad Satpathy and             ...          Opposite parties
            others
                                                        Mr. H.S. Deo, Advocate
                                                               for O.Ps. 1 and2

                       CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
                                       ORDER

02.02.2022

Order No.

07. 1. Mr. Jena, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and

submits, his client is a co-sharer of the suit property but was not made

party in the suit. Collusive preliminary and final decrees were got

obtained in the suit. Execution was launched by Execution Case no.3

of 2012. His client applied for being added as party in the execution

case. By impugned order dated 8th March, 2018, his client's application

was rejected.

2. On query from Court he submits, his client thereafter filed I.A.

no.36 of 2022 before the execution Court under order XXI rule 97,

// 2 //

Code of Civil Procedure resisting execution. That application is

pending before the Execution Court.

3. Mr. Deo, learned advocate appears on behalf of opposite party

nos.2 and 4. He submits, petitioner had also filed first appeal against

impugned order.

4. It is well settled that a decree can only be executed against

judgment debtors. On behalf of petitioner there is submission that he

was not made party in the suit, though he is a co-sharer. As such,

petitioner has applied in resisting execution of decree against him. That

is the application that must be dealt with by the executing Court. So far

as petitioner's earlier application for being added as party in the

execution case is concerned, the executing Court appears to have

correctly dealt with it in rejecting the same. Said Court is requested to

deal with petitioner's application, i.e., I.A. no.36 of 2022 expeditiously

by first dispose of it before proceeding with the execution.

5. The CMP is disposed of.

(Arindam Sinha) Judge Prasant