Mr. D.R. Chowdhury vs None
2022 Latest Caselaw 978 Tri

                          HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                                AGARTALA

                                CRP 88/2022

For Petitioner(s)     :     Mr. D.R. Chowdhury, Sr. Advocate.
                            Mr. S. Sarkar, Advocate.

For Respondent(s)     :     None.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. CHATTOPADHYAY Order

22/11/2022

Heard Mr. D. R. Chowdhury, learned senior advocate appearing

along with Mr. S. Sarkar, learned advocate for the petitioners.

[2] It is submitted by Mr. Chowdhury, learned senior counsel that

in Title Suit (Partition) 06 of 2015, the trial Court issued preliminary

decree by judgment and order dated 29.5.2017 and issued final

decree on 03.10.2019 for partition of the decretal property on the

basis of the report of the Commissioner appointed by the Court.

Counsel contends that on the basis of an erroneous report submitted

by the Commissioner, the decretal property was partitioned. As a

result, the land which fell in the share of the present petitioner was

pathways beyond the homestead land which is of no use to the

petitioner. Counsel contends that when the said decree was put to

execution, the present petitioner raised objection by filing a petition

under Section 47, CPC before the executing Court which has been

rejected by the executing Court by the impugned order dated

03.09.2022 passed in Execution (T) 01 of 2021.

[3] Mr. Chowdhury, learned senior counsel contends that the

petitioner raised serious issues before the executing Court but, the

learned executing Court has passed a brief order without assigning

any reason of rejecting the contentions raised by the petitioner

before the Court. Counsel submits that if the executing Court is

allowed to proceed with the execution proceedings, the present

petition pending before this Court shall be infructuous and the

petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss. Counsel, therefore, urges the

Court to stay the execution of the decree at least till the returnable

date.

[4] It appears from the record that steps were taken by the

petitioners for issuing notice to the respondents in terms of the order

passed by this Court on 08.11.2022. But, till date there is no proof of

service of the notice on the respondents.

[5] I have gone through the record and considered the

submissions of Mr. Chowdhury, learned senior counsel. From the

materials available on record, this Court is of the prima facie view

that there is merit in the petition. Therefore, the execution

proceedings pending before the executing Court shall remain stayed

till the next date.

List the matter on 06.12.2022.

Inform the executing Court accordingly.

JUDGE

Sabyasachi G.