Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:24354 Court No. - 9 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1670 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Kumar Sharma (Deceased) And 4 Others Respondent :- Gaurav Mohan Gupta And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohan Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Pankaj Agarwal Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Pankaj Agarwal, learned counsel for respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed assailing the order passed in execution proceedings in Original Suit No. 455 of 2005 wherein application moved under Order XXI Rule 101 CPC has been rejected, against which a civil revision was filed being Civil Revision No. 50 of 2019 which has also been rejected. 3. Brief facts leading to present writ petition are that respondent no. 1 filed an Original Suit No. 455 of 2005 against respondent no. 2 for eviction. The said suit was decreed by judgment and order dated 18.09.2006. Execution was filed in the year 2007 wherein petitioner had moved an application under Order XXI Rule 99 CPC on 19.09.2007. An application under Order XXI Rule 101 was filed on 26.05.2017. By order impugned the application filed on 26.05.2017 being Paper No. 70 C2 was rejected on 23.03.2019, against which a revision has been preferred, which has also been rejected. Hence, present writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that Suit No. 455 of 2005 filed by respondent no. 1 was a collusive suit against a company which was not in existence nor it was incorporated as private limited company. According to petitioners' counsel accommodation was leased out by the mother of plaintiffs and rent receipts were issued. He further contends that both the Courts concerned could not have dismissed the application filed under Order XXI Rule 101 CPC as the question was to be determined as decree was passed without arraying the petitioners as defendants in the suit and application moved under Order XXI Rule 99 CPC is maintainable. 5. Sri Pankaj Agarwal, learned counsel for respondents, submits that there stands no tenancy in favour of petitioners and property in question was never let out to the petitioners. The suit was instituted against a company and it was decreed in the year 2006 against which company did not prefer any appeal and decree became final. He further contends that there is no pleading in the application moved under Order XXI Rule 99 CPC as to how petitioners are in possession of the property and what locus they have over the property. He further submits that Courts concerned have rightly rejected the application filed under Order XXI Rule 101 CPC as the question cannot be determined unless petitioners set up their case. 6. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material on record. It is an admitted case that there is no rent deed executed between the landlord and the petitioners, who claim to be the tenant. Petitioners were occupying the property in question as strangers or as an unauthorized occupant. Further, there is no pleadings in the application moved under Order XXI Rule 99 CPC as to the locus, how they are continuing over the property and only disclosure in application is as to the company having been incorporated wrongly and it is a joint Hindu family property. The suit filed by plaintiffs cannot be said to be collusive unless and until petitioners set up their case. Application filed under Order XXI Rule 99 CPC cannot be maintained and no question arises for determination as provided in Order XXI Rule 101 CPC. The finding recorded by the Courts concerned during execution proceedings needs no interference by this Court as petitioners have miserably failed to place their case before execution court as to how their application is maintainable under Order XXI Rule 99 CPC as they seems to be the strangers to the proceedings and do not have any right over the property in question, nor had disputed the title of the owner, nor have placed any material on record to substantiate that they are tenant of the accommodation in question. 7. Writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 Shekhar Digitally signed by :- SHASHI SHEKHAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad