CRP 249/2008 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.P.KATAKEY Heard Mr. D.C. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitio ners/ judgment debtors. The judgment debtors, by the present application have sought to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of I ndia in challenging the order dated 30.05.2008 passed by the learned Executing C ourt in Title Execution Case No.1/2008 rejecting the application filed under Sec tion 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure which was filed on the ground that the de cree passed in Title Suit No.5/1997 is not executable, inasmuch as, the decree h older by filing the execution proceeding have sought to execute the decree in re spect of the land for which the decree has not been passed. Mr. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners referr ing to the decree drawn on 2nd June, 2007 in Title Suit No.5/‘97, has submitted that it is apparent from the schedule that the plaintiffs are in possession of 1 5 Lechas of land in Dag No.48 in the northern boundary, out of total land of 4 K athas 15 Lechas of land covered by Dag No.48 of Village Tokowbari No.2, Mouza Si ssi in the district of Dhemaji, Assam and, therefore, the decree is in fact in r espect of 4 Kathas of land in that dag only. According to Mr. Mahanta, since the plaintiffs are admittedly in possession of 15 Lechas of land, out of the total land of 4 Kathas 15 Lechas in Dag No.48, there cannot be any question of executi on of decree in respect of 4 Kathas 15 Lechas of land in Dag No.48 or in respect of the land under possession of the defendants. It is apparent from the schedule of the decree dated 02.06.2007 that the land has been described as Land measuring 0B-4K-15L covered by Dag No.48 of vi llage No.2 Tokowbari Gaon, map Mouza Sissi, in the District of Dhemaji, Assam an d bounded by- North - A part land of above Dag No.48 measuring 15 Ls. and also a part of the plaintiffs’ house. South- Land of Sri Nakul Chutia. East- Land of Sri Chandidhar Dowrah and also the house of the defendants of this suit. West - Land of No.2 defendants and also land of Baneswar Saikia. According to Mr.Mahanta, since the plaintiffs are in possession of 15 Le chas of land out of total land measuring 4 Kathas 15 lechas covered in Dag No.48 , there cannot be any execution of the decree in respect of more than 4 Kathas o f land covered by Dag No.48, as the plaintiffs are in possession of 15 lechas of land in that dag. According to Mr. Mahanta, no execution can be effected in res pect of land covered by other Dag. The Decree being in respect of Dag No.48 and the said Dag comprised 4 Ka thas 15 Lechas, the decree is to be executed in respect of Dag No.48 only, even if the plaintiffs are in possession of 15 Lechas. The Court cannot go behind the decree and execute the same in respect of other Dag. It is, however, not the ca se of the judgment debtors that they are in possession of any land in Dag No.48. The learned Court vide order dated 30.05.2008 while rejecting the applic ation filed under Section 47 CPC has not observed that the decree will be execut ed in respect of the land not covered by Dag No.48. In view of the decree passed , the Court shall execute the same in respect of Dag No.48 and not beyond that. In view of the above, I do not consider it necessary to interfere with t he order passed by the learned Executing Court. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.