D.K.Seth, J. - (1.) Leave granted to convert the petition into one under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) The petitioner has challenged the order dated 1st May. 1999 passed by the learned District Judge, Kanpur Nagar in Civil Revision No. 102 of 1999 affirming the order dated 19th March, 1999 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kanpur Nagar in Execution Case No. 39 of 1997. It is alleged that the suit properly consists of a building and as such comes under the purview of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting Rent and Eviction) Act. 1972. therefore, the civil court could not have assumed Jurisdiction and pass the decree by reason of Section 20 of the said Act, which provides bar of suit before the civil court prescribing the forum before which such proceedings are to be initiated. The trial court had dismissed the said objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the ground that the suit property was described as a vacant land and the decree was so obtained. The revisional court had found that the land was a vacant land and the receipt granted to the petitioner was that of a vacant land. However, the petitioner had sought to produce receipt, which was disbelieved by the executing court to the extent that it does not seem to be genuine since there was interpolation.
(3.) Mr. S. R. Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that by reason of provisions contained in Section 47 of the Code, all questions relating to the decree shall be gone into in the proceedings under Section 47 of the Code and not by a separate suit. Therefore, this is a question which should have been decided by the Court.;