A.N.Varma, J. - (1.) This is a judgment-debtors application in revision directed against concurrent orders passed by the courts below rejecting an objection of the applicants under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2.) Facts relevant for the decision of the issues raised in the revision are as follows: The decree-holder-opposite parties filed a suit against the judgment-debtor-applicants for possession over a certain piece of land and for demolition of certain constructions raised by judgment-debtor-applicants over the land in suit. There was also a prayer in the suit for permanent injunction restraining the judgment-debtor-applicants from making any further construction over the land in suit. The decree-holder-opposite parties case was that they had taken the land in suit measuring 240 square yards on a lease from the State of U. P. and that the judgment-debtor-applicants had wrongfully occupied an area measuring 36x23 on 1-11-1965. The decree-holder-opposite parties thereupon filed the aforesaid suit for the reliefs mentioned above. This suit was contested by the applicants on the ground that the suit was barred by time and that they had been in possession for a long time. The trial court held that the decree-holder-opposite parties were the lessees and that the judgment-debtor-applicants had wrongfully occupied the land in suit. The trial court passed a decree for possession against the judgment-debtor-applicants.
(3.) Aggrieved, the judgment-debtor-applicants filed an appeal. The appellate court affirmed the findings of the trial court and dismissed the appeal. Thereupon, the applicants filed a second appeal being Second Appeal No. 2976 of 1971 which was dismissed on 9-1-1976 (All). It appears that after the dismissal of the second appeal, the decree-holder opposite parties put their decree into execution. The applicants filed an objection under Section 47 C.P.C. asserting that the decree was in executable as the decree-holder-opposite parties had ceased to be the lessee of the Government, the lease in their favour having expired and that the executing court had no jurisdiction to proceed with the execution in view of Section 15 of the U. P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972 (U. P. Act No. 22 of 1972). The trial court rejected the objection of the applicant.;