w^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) WRIT PETITION^ (227) No. ^-<%)-^ OF 2010 '->- 6i! PETITIONERS ^Sen. <^^I)'G'»I?^ •\ RESPONDENT t^pLicant— iA?<' (^. >"'^ ^ ^^ -•• \° ''x^' .^ff 1. 2. ^ ^ Abdul Razzak, Son of late Salar Bux, aged about 70 years, Srat. Haseena Begam, Wife of Abdul Razzak, aged about 65 years, Both R/o. House No. 30/304, Brahraanpara Ward, Raipur, DistrictRaipur (C.G.), VERSUS Shri Ram Awatar Agrawal, Son of Late Somchand Agrawal, aged about 70 years, R/o. Ashwani Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT/WRITS, ORDER/ORDERS, DIRECTION/DIRECTIONS etc. <'-;- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (227) No. 6006 of2010 PETFTIONERS Non-applicante RESPONDENT AppUcant Abdul Razzak & another Versus : Shri Ram Awatar Agrawal WMT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTrTUnON_^^DIA (SB: Hon'Ue Mr. N.K. Aaarwal. J.) Present : Smt. Hameeda Siddique, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri HB Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Sareena Khan, Advocate for respondent. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 28.02.2011) 1. Order dated 27.07.2010, passed by the IInd Addl. Judge to Ist Civil Judge, Class II, Raipur, in Execution Case No. 151-A/65 is under assail in the instant petition. 2. The respondent moved an application for execution of decree of specific perfonnance of contract passed by the civil court in his favour against one Chhedi alias Salarbux on 04,12.1967. The petitioner herein objected above execution on the groimd they are joint pwner of the suit property along with judgment debtor and without there being any partition, the possession ofthe suit property cannot be handed over to the respondent. The trial court dismissed the petitioner's objection. Hence this petition. 3. At this stage, Shri HB Agrawal, leamed Sr. counsel appearing for the respondent submits Ihat the execution application was filed only for getting the sale deed executed in terms of decree passed in his ^\ favour and the respondent is not trying to get possession ofthe suit property. 4. In view of above, the petition is disposed of and the trial conrt is directed to decide the exeeution proceeding filed by the respondent in accordance with law so far as exeeution of the sale deed is concemed. So far as delivery of possession is concemed, the respondent is required to file a separate suit for partition. No order as to costs. Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge Sahu