Satara Pradhan @ Satara vs Collector, Kandhamal And others

K.R. Mohapatra, J

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

Order dated 23rd March, 2024 (Annexure-3) passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), G. Udayagiri in Execution Case No. 2 of 2023 is under challenge in this CMP, whereby an application for stay of the execution case has been rejected. The Petitioner further assails the notice dated 30th March, 2024 for eviction issued by the Executing Court.

Mr. Mandal, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the decree holder obtained the ex parte decree by playing fraud with the Court. The Petitioner being the J.Dr. filed an application under Section 47 C.P.C. challenging the executability of the decree. He further assails the substitution of Opposite Party No.7 as legal heir of late Chandramati Pradhan. The Petitioner also prays therein that execution proceeding should be stayed till disposal of the petition under Section 47 C.P.C. as well as the petition to determine who is the proper legal heir of late Chandramati Pradhan. The Opposite Party No.7 styling herself to be the sole legal heir of late Chandramati Pradhan, has filed the execution case, which is not maintainable. The ex parte decree is under challenge before the higher forum. Thus, in the aforesaid scenario, the execution proceeding should not proceed. Although a detailed order was passed by learned Executing Court, these vital aspects were not taken into consideration. Hence, he prays for setting aside the impugned order.

Taking note of the submission made by learned counsel for the Petitioner and on perusal of the record, it appears that in the meantime, both the petition under Section 47 C.P.C. as well as the petition to determine the locus standi of Opposite Party No.7 to proceed with the execution case have already been decided. As such, prayer for stay of further proceeding in the execution case has become infructuous. Accordingly, the CMP merits no consideration and is accordingly dismissed.

...………………………….…......