IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
First Appeal No.171 of 1986
Gopi Ahir @ G.Chy.& Ors
Versus
Indrasan Chaudhary & Ors
----------------------------------
17. 16.08.2011. Heard the learned counsel for the respondent
nos.1 and 2 on I.A. No.1670 of 2011.
This Interlocutory Application has been filed
under Order 39 Rule 2A read with Section 151 of the
C.P.C. for initiating a contempt proceeding for violating
the order dated 06.03.2009 by the appellant no.1, 2(i),
2(ii), 5 and respondent no.17.
The learned counsel, Mr. Yogendra Prasad
Sinha appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.1 and
2 submitted that by the order dated 06.03.2009, the
said appellant and respondents were restrained from
going over the plot nos.306 and 307 which were
allotted to the respondent nos.1 and 2 in the final
decree proceeding. At the time of hearing of this
Interlocutory Application, the learned counsel for the
respondent nos.1 and 2 submitted that still the delivery
of possession has not been affected through the
execution case filed by the plaintiff-respondent nos.1
and 2 for delivery of possession according to the final
decree.
From perusal of the Interlocutory Application, it
appears that nowhere the respondent nos.1 and 2 have
asserted that they were in possession of the said two
2
plots. No doubt, even if the said plots are allotted in
their share but according to the learned counsel, still
the execution proceeding is going on and the delivery of
possession has not been affected. The learned counsel
submitted that according to the final decree, they came
in possession over the said property. In my opinion, at
this stage, under Article 39 Rule 2A, no such finding can
be given.
Accordingly, I find no merit in this application.
Therefore, this application being I.A. No.1670 of 2011 is
rejected.
Saurabh (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)