Pankaj Bhandari, J. - (1.) Heard counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are that a suit was filed for declaration and possession against the State Government by nonpetitioner No.1 in the year 1978 and the same was decreed on 19.09.1997 (Annexure-P/10). The appeal preferred by the State against the said judgment and decree was dismissed for nonprosecution. The restoration application preferred by the State was rejected by the High Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court did not interfere with the said order.
(3.) An execution petition was filed by the non-petitioner, in pursuance of which part possession was taken by non-petitioner No.1. The petitioner herein has filed objections under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC (Annexure-P/7). An application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was also preferred by non-petitioner No.1, which was allowed and the objection petition filed by the present petitioner was dismissed. The appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order allowing the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was dismissed by the High Court, against which the petitioner preferred an SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide Annexure-P/4 passed the following order on 15.12.2015 :- " . . . . After hearing counsel for the rival parties at some length, a joint proposal was made by them to the Court, that the impugned order be set aside, and the matter be remanded back to the trial court for fresh adjudication, on the issue of maintainability as well as, on merits. And that, the suit be decided, only after the rival parties have been granted liberty to lead their evidence. . . . . . ";