SHIV KUMAR SHARMA,J. - (1.) INSTANT revision has been filed against the order dated 9.9.1997 of the executing court whereby objections of the petitioner preferred under Section 47 read with Order 21 Rule 97, CPC were dismissed.
(2.) IN view of Order 21 Rule 103, CPC the impugned order amounts to a decree therefore I propose to deal with the instant petition treating it as appeal. Admittedly the decree dated 13.5.1997 was passed in favour of the decree holder in a suit instituted under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act 1963. The decree holder sought execution of the said decree by filing execution petition seeking restoration of possession of the shop from where he was dispossessed on 17.9.1990 by the judgment debtor without due process of law.
(3.) BEFORE the executing court the petitioner submitted objection petition with the averments that the title of the shop vests in Mst. Fatima Begum who had purchased the property through registered deed dated 14.10.1981 from Smt. Gopali Devi Jhalani. The petitioner was inducted tenant by Mst. Fatima Begum w.e.f. 1.6.1994. Mst. Fatima Begum thereafter sold the property to Abdul Hafiz and Abdul Rashid through registered sale deed dated 6.10.1995. The petitioner being the tenant of Mst. Fatima Begum, was not bound by the decree dated 13.5.1997 passed against Amannullah Khan and Attaullah Khan. Learned executing court vide impugned order dismissed the objections raised by the pettioner and observed that the petitioner was bound by the decree under Order 21 Rule 102, CPC.;