Narendra Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for both the parties.
(2.) THIS appeal under Section 96 read with Order 21 Rule 102 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the impugned judgment dated 06.08.2007 passed by the Additional District Judge, Rajgarh, District Alwar, in Objection Petition No. 82/2006, whereby the Objection Petition filed by the objector -appellant under Order 21 Rule 97 of the CPC has been dismissed. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the respondent No. 2 Durga Prasad was the owner of the disputed property and he executed an agreement to sell it in favour of deceased respondent No. 1 Ram Kishore, who filed a suit for specific performance of the agreement, which was decreed in his favour. In pursuance of the decree passed by the trial court in favour of the Ram Kishore, a sale -deed was executed and registered and on that basis the disputed plot was also mutated in the revenue record in favour of decree -holder, who filed an application for execution of the decree for possession of the disputed plot.
(3.) DURING the pendency of the execution petition, Smt. Guddi Devi, the appellant herein, filed the Objection Petition under Order 21 Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure stating therein that she is the owner of the disputed plot and she is in actual physical possession of the same. It was also contended by her that during the pendency of the suit she moved an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC, which was dismissed on the ground that the suit is in between Ram Kishore and Durga Prasad, and any decree passed therein will not be binding on her, therefore, she has a right to file the present Objection Petition.;