IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20087 of 2010 Ainul Haque son of Rustam Ali, resident of village Bairiya Tola, Baradih, P.O.Bairiya, P.S. Kesariya, District- East Champaran. Petitioner. Versus 1. Basudeo Rai son of late Brahmdeo Rai 2. Tuntun Rai son of Basudeo Rai 3. Arbind Rai son ofo Basudeo Rai, All resident of village and P.O.Bairiya, P.S.Keshariya, District- East Champaran. Respondents. ---------------------------------- 2. 20.9.2011. Heard Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. The writ petition has been filed seeking appropriate direction of this court to the court of Munsif, Sadar, Motihari to dispose of Execution Case No.7 of 2004 expeditiously. In view of the nature of the order that is to be passed in the present proceedings, there is no requirement of issuing notice to the respondents. The brief facts of the matter is that a title suit was filed by the petitioner giving rise to T.S.No.54 of 1997 for declaration of title and recovery of possession. The suit was decreed on contest vide judgment and decree dated 23.2.2004. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree passed by the trial court, the defendant filed a title appeal giving rise to Title Appeal No.22 of 2004 (12 of 2005) 2 which was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge cum Fast Track Court, III, East Champaran vide judgment and order dated 29.2.2008. The defendant preferred a second appeal before this court giving rise to S.A.No.150 of 2008 and which was dismissed at the stage of hearing under order 41 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure vide order passed on 4.11.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that to his information, no appeal has been preferred by the defendant challenging the judgment and decree passed in favour of the petitioner before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. He submits that in the circumstances that the judgment and decree passed by the trial court, has attained finality by the dismissal of the second appeal preferred by the defendants, the plaintiff filed an Execution Case giving rise to Execution Case N0o.7 of 2004 and which is pending consideration before the court of the Munsif, Sadar, Motihari. It is contended that as considerable time has elapsed since the filing of the execution case in the year 2004, hence, the petitioner has been constrained to move this 3 court seeking the reliefs aforesaid. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the materials on record and considering the fact that the execution case was filed 7 years back, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the Munsif, Sadar, Motihari to dispose of the Execution Case No.7 of 2004 in accordance with law after giving appropriate opportunity of hearing to the contesting parties, expeditiously. ahk (Jyoti Saran, J.)