CRP 211/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANIMA HAZARIKA (ORAL) Heard Mr. N Dhar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed b y the petitioner challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 26.4.2 011 passed by the learned Munsiff No.2, Kamrup, Guwahati in Misc. case No.563/20 10 arising out of T.Ex. No.23/2008 rejecting the petition filed by the petitione r under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code (’CPC’ for short) praying therein to dismiss the execution proceeding. The petitioner’s case in brief is that respondent as plaintiff filed Title Suit No.234/2005 in the court of Civil Judge No.1, Kamrup, Guwahati praying inter ali a for a decree of ejectment of the petitioner/defendant from the suit house prem ises covered by holding No.369 of Ward No.17-A of the Guwahati Municipal Corpora tion (’GMC’ for short) allegedly purchased by the respondent/plaintiff in the ye ar 1982. As per statements made in the plaint, admittedly there is no written te nancy agreement between the parties in respect of the suit house premises. It ha s further been stated in the plaint that the plaintiff on 24.2.2003 asked the de fendant to vacate the suit house but the petitioner declined to vacate the same or to pay house rent. Hence, filed the suit on the ground of defaulter and bonaf ide requirement. The petitioner/defendant filed written statement in the suit denying the avermen ts made in the plaint. But the defendant in his evidence admitted that he did no t deposit the rent in the court after institution of the suit. So, learned court found him defaulter and also from the evidence of plaintiffs as well as defenda nt’s witnesses, the learned court came to the conclusion that the suit premises was bonafide required by the plaintiffs. Hence, decreed the suit on the above tw o grounds vide judgment and decree dated 30.7.2008 directing eviction of the pet itioner/defendant from the suit house premises. The respondent/plaintiff, thereafter, filed the Title Execution Case No.23/2008 in the court of learned Munsiff No.2, Kamrup, Guwahati for execution of the dec ree. The petitioner/defendant filed a miscellaneous application on 8.9.2010 bein g registered as Misc.(J)Case No.563/2010 praying inter alia to dismiss the Title Execution Case No.23/2008 filed by the respondent/decree holder on the ground t hat in the judgment and order dated 30.7.2008, passed in TS No.234/2005, nowhere mentioned the description of the suit house from where the petitioner/judgment debtor was directed to be evicted, inasmuch as, the suit house described in the Schedule ’B’ of the plaint is not identifiable. More so, judgment debtor is sta ying at Rehabari in Ward No.27 not 17-A as mentioned in the schedule of the plai nt. In the aforesaid misc. case, the respondent/opposite party filed an objectio n. The learned Executing Court vide order dated 26.4.2011 dismissed the misc. ca se with cost of Rs.2,000/- on the ground that, 1) Suit land is identifiable and hence, decree is executable. 2) Defendant/judgment debtor is trying to delay the execution proceeding by filing frivolous petition one after another. 3) Defendant/judgment debtor earlier filed another petition for dismissal o f the execution proceeding which was rejected and thereafter again filed the pet ition under Section 47 of the CPC. The aforesaid order dated 26.4.2011 is under challenge in the instant petition. I have perused the materials available on record as well as the impugned order d ated 26.4.2011 passed in Misc.(J) Case No.563/2010. Upon perusal of the aforesai d order, I have found no illegality and/or material irregularity committed by th e learned court below in passing the impugned order. Having found thus, this Cou rt is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order dated 26.4.2011 invoking power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The civil revision petition, accordingly, stands dismissed. No costs.