Badamia Devi vs Maheshwar Mochi

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

This Civil Miscellaneous Application has been filed for setting aside the order dated 20.05.2019 passed by the Court of learned Munsif, Begusarai in Title Execution Case No. 05 of 2007 whereby the learned Court below has allowed the amendment petition under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that by the impugned order the amendment petition dated 21.12.2018 filed on behalf of the decree holder is allowed by which “Two Pucca” written in execution petition at page no. 9 in Schedule-I have been deleted and in its place “Khaprail” is inserted. He has apprehension that the executing Court may evict the two “Khaprail” rooms of the petitioners. On consent of the learned counsel for the petitioners this case is being disposed of at this stage after hearing of the learned counsel for the petitioners.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the impugned order. In the impugned order the learned executing Court has observed that the details of suit land is given in Schedule-II of the decree dated 23.08.2016 as 15 feet north to south 7 & 1/2 feet east to west Khaprails room having boundary North-Plaintiff, South-Plaintiff, East-Plaintiff and West-Plaintiff situated at Mauza-Lakho, Pergana-Balia, Thana No. 337, Tauzi No. 4035, Khata No. 63, Khesra No. 342 and District-Begusarai, but in the execution petition details of land over which the delivery of possession be effected is given in Schedule-I. The other description of the suit land is same except the endorsement of two Pucca room in the place of Khaprails room. Since the execution is limited to the extent of original decree and Decree holder accepted that wrong endorsement of the suit land is mentioned in Schedule-I of the Execution Petition. Therefore, in order to effect execution correctly according to the decree the said amendment petition was allowed on cost.

The learned executing Court below has categorically stated that the execution is limited to the extent of original decree, accordingly, allowed the correction in the execution petition in accordance with the original decree.

In view of the aforesaid, this Court finds no jurisdictional error or illegality in the impugned order. The Civil Miscellaneous Application is devoid of merit and liable to be rejected.

This Civil Miscellaneous Application is accordingly, dismissed. The learned Court below is directed to expedite the disposal of the Title Execution Case No. 05 of 2007, if it not disposed of, in accordance with the law.