A-48 \ % 27.09.2011 Present: Mr. Jitendra Pancharia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Dinesh K. Gupta, Advocate for the respondent. +CM No. 18154/2011 (exemption) in Tr.P. No. 78/2011 * Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. Tr.P. No. 78/2011 and CM No. 18155/2011 (stay) Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks transfer of 2 appeals which are pending before the Additional District Judge, East, Karkardoom, Delhi; first appeal is Appeal No. 62/2010 is titled as 'Raj Kumar Gupta vs. Bindo Devi' and the second appeal is Appeal No. 63/2010 titled as 'Jado Prakash Gupta vs. Bindo Devi'. These appeals have arisen out of two suits for declaration filed by the present petitioner challenging the Will of his deceased grand father dated 19.12.1983; both suits had been dismissed; the said two appeals are now pending before the Additional District Judge, East, Karkardooma, Delhi. The present execution petition No. 25/2011 i.e. 'Anil Kumar Gupta vs. Raj Kumar Gupta' has been filed by the non- applicant/respondent/decree-holder in terms of a decree dated 15.03.2011 which suit had been decreed in RFA No. 420/2011 by the High Court; this was a decree for possession of the suit premises by one brother against his cousin brother; the appeal filed against the RFA has also since been dismissed by the Apex Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified 2^ Court; this is an admitted position. It is further admitted that in the execution proceedings, objections had been filed under Order 21 Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure which are yet awaiting adjudication. The present petitioner has objected that the executing court does not have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the execution petition; all these matters are sub-judice and can be decided in the objections which are pending before the executing court. No ground is made out for transfer of the present proceedings which have arisen out of separate and independent proceedings; the appeals pending before ADJ, East Karkardooma, Delhi are against the dismissal of the suits of the petitioner challenging the Will of his grand-father. This is not the purpose and purport of Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Petition is dismissed. INDERMEET KAUR, J. SEPTEMBER 27, 2011 rb