AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 10.02.2021 in the Execution No. 61 of 2020 of the order dated 12.04.2019. It is submitted that directions given in the order dated 10.02.2021 are in violation of order dated 12.04.2019. It is submitted that as per the final order dated 12.04.2019 the possession had to be given in terms of the agreement. It is submitted that as per the agreement certain amounts are due towards the Decree Holder and unless the Decree Holder pays the said amount the possession cannot be handed over. It is submitted that vide impugned order dated 10.02.2021, the Executing Court has discharged the Decree Holder of its liability to make the payment as per the contract and hence liable to be set aside.
I have heard the Ld. Counsel for the Decree Holder. He has submitted that they are not liable to pay anything and are entitled for possession.
I have perused the file. It is apparent that vide order dated 12.04.2019, the State Commission had directed handing over of the possession in terms of the agreement and, therefore, the impugned order whereby the Decree Holder is discharged from making any payment due under the agreement, is illegal and perverse. The said order is, therefore, set aside. The appeal stands disposed of in these terms. Parties to appear before the State Commission on the date already fixed. Copy of the order be sent to the State Commission.