Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:94001 Court No. - 1 Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION No. - 46 of 2025 Applicant :- Km. Shanti Devi Jain Opposite Party :- Hukum Singh Verma Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Pathak Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J. 1. Heard Sri Dinesh Pathak, learned counsel for applicant. 2. Present review application has been filed for reviewing the order dated 27.05.2024 passed in SCC Revision No. 73 of 2024. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that brief facts of the case are that two SCC Revisions have filed; one SCC Revision No. 73 of 2024 has been filed by present applicant challenging the order dated 14.08.2023, by which execution proceeding was terminated recalling the order dated 19.05.2023. Another SCC Revision No. 74 of 2024 was filed by the defendant-opposite party challenging the judgment and order dated 18.07.2022 and 01.08.2022 passed by Additional District Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Small Cause Judge/Court No. 2, Meerut in S.C.C. Case No. 16 of 2016. Both the revisions were heard together and this Court has first decided SCC Revision No. 74 of 2024 and dismissed the same vide order dated 27.05.2024 affirming the judgment and decree dated 18.07.2022 & 01.08.2022 granting six months time to vacate the house in question. 4. He next submitted that while entertaining S.C.C. Revision No. 73 of 2024, this Court instead of passing the order of quashing the impugned order, has held that in light of judgment dated 27.05.2024 passed in SCC Revision No. 74 of 2024, no further order is required to be passed. 5. He further submitted that against the order dated 27.05.2024 passed in SCC Revision No. 74 of 2024, Special Leave to Appeal(C) No. 16761 of 2024 was filed, which was dismissed vide order dated 05.08.2024. 6. He lastly submitted that this Court vide order dated 27.05.2024 passed in SCC Revision No. 74 of 2024 has granted six months to vacate the house in question, but the same has not been vacated. Thereafter, revisionist has approached the Execution Court to get the order executed, but the Execution Court has refused to interfere on the ground that impugned order dated 14.08.2023 challenged in in SCC Revision No. 73 of 2024 has not been set aside. Applicant has also approached contempt court by filing Contempt Application (Civil) No. 7372 of 2024, which was also dismissed vide order dated 27.11.2024 on the ground that there is no order in SCC Revision No. 73 of 2024. 7. I have considered submissions made by learned counsel for applicant and perused the records. 8. As both the revisions have been heard together and once SCC Revision No. 74 of 2024 was dismissed granting six months time to vacate the house in question, therefore, instead of setting aside the order impugned in SCC Revision No. 73 of 2024, this Court has held that in the light of judgment and order dated 27.05.2024 passed in SCC Revision No. 74 of 2024, no further order is required. Now, it is implied that in case of non-compliance of order passed in SCC Revision No. 74 of 2024, Execution Court has to proceed to get the order executed. 9. Now, present position is that order dated 27.05.2024 passed in SCC Revision No. 74 of 2024 has been affirmed by the Apex Court vide order dated 05.08.2024, therefore, in light of such facts, order impugned dated 14.08.2023 challenged in in SCC Revision No. 73 of 2024 is hereby quashed. Order dated 27.05.2024 passed in SCC Revision No. 73 of 2024 is reviewed. 10. Execution Court is directed to pass necessary orders forthwith for execution of order dated 18.07.2022 and decree dated 01.08.2022 passed by Additional District Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Small Cause Judge/Court No. 2, Meerut in favour of applicant. 11. Accordingly, review application is allowed. Order Date :- 30.5.2025 Sartaj Digitally signed by :- SARTAJ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad