Sri Pochampally Muralidhar Rao vs Sri Rapolu Mahesh Kumar
2021 Latest Caselaw 520 Tel

Item No.50


     THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
                                 AND
      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY


                    WRIT APPEAL No.47 of 2021

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hima Kohli)


1.    The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 02.12.2020

passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of W.P.No.18149 of

2019 filed by the respondent No.1/writ petitioner who had sought

police protection against them for seeking enforcement of a judgment

and decree dated 26.07.2018 passed by the learned Principal Junior

Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, in O.S.No.32 of

2018 and for restraining the appellants from resisting enforcement of

the said judgment and decree.

2. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has disposed

of the captioned writ petition while granting liberty to the respondent

No.1/writ petitioner to file an appropriate application before the police

for seeking protection with a further direction to the police that as and

when such an application is submitted, they shall extend protection to

the respondent No.1/writ petitioner for enforcement of the judgment

and decree, during its subsistence.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants states that the aforesaid

order came to be passed in the absence of the appellants, who were

not even served with a notice in the writ petition. She submits that

instead of seeking enforcement of the judgment and decree dated

26.07.2018 passed in O.S.No.32 of 2018 in accordance with law, the

respondent No.1/writ petitioner has cleverly filed a writ petition

seeking police aid, which is impermissible.

4. On enquiring from learned counsel for the respondent No.1/writ

petitioner as to whether any steps have been taken by his client so far

to file an execution petition for seeking execution of the judgment and

decree dated 26.07.2018, the answer is in the negative. Learned

counsel states that no steps have been taken so far.

5. It is rather surprising that instead of seeking appropriate legal

recourse as provided for under Order XXI of the Code of Civil

Procedure for execution of the judgment and decree dated 26.07.2018,

the respondent No.1/writ petitioner has knocked at the doors of the

Court by invoking the powers of judicial review, which is

impermissible. Further, it is not denied by learned counsel for the

respondent No.1/writ petitioner that the impugned order came to be

passed in the absence of the appellants and no service was effected on

them before the said order was passed. That itself is sufficient ground

to quash and set aside the impugned order.

6. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 02.12.2020 passed in

W.P.No.18149 of 2019 is quashed and set aside with liberty granted to

the respondent No.1/writ petitioner to seek execution of the judgment

and decree dated 26.07.2018 in O.S.No.32 of 2018 as per the

procedure prescribed in the Code of Civil Procedure.

7. The appeal is accordingly allowed along with the pending

applications, if any.

______________________________ HIMA KOHLI, CJ

______________________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J

23.02.2021 vs