1 2025:CGHC:32570 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 642 of 2025 1. Govardhan S/o Ram Singh Aged About 37 Years Caste Satnami, Occupation - Farmer R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 2) 2. Samari W/o Late Ram Singh Aged About 55 Years Caste Satnami, Occupation Farmer, R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 1) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. Jagannath S/o Late Chatur Singh Aged About 54 Years Caste - Chatriya, Occupation - Job And Farmer R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Plaintiff) 2. Girija D/o Narayan Singh Aged About 40 Years Caste - Chatriya, Occupation - Farmer R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 3) 3. Tarun Singh S/o Narayan Singh Aged About 36 Years Caste - Chatriya, Occupation - Farmer R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 4) 4. Komal S/o Narayan Singh Aged About 32 Years Caste - Chatriya, Occupation - Farmer R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 5) 5. Shankar Singh S/o Late Chatur Singh Aged About 60 Years Caste - Chatriya, Occupation - Farmer R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 6) 6. Rameshwari W/o Late Raghuraj Singh Aged About 46 Years Caste - Chatriya, Occupation - Farmer R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 7) 7. Sunil S/o Late Raghuraj Singh Aged About 28 Years Caste - Chatriya, Occupation - Farmer R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 8) 8. Nandini D/o Late Raghuraj Singh Aged About 23 Years Caste - Chatriya, Occupation - Farmer R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 9) SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.07.16 17:44:19 +0530 2 9. Yasoda D/o Late Raghuraj Singh Aged About 20 Years Caste - Chatriya, Occupation - Farmer R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 10) 10.Jaishree D/o Late Raghuraj Singh Aged About 20 Years Caste - Chatriya, Occupation - Farmer R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 11) 11.Chitrabhan Singh S/o Late Chatur Singh Aged About 57 Years Caste - Chatriya, Occupation - Farmer R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 12) 12.State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh (Defendant No. 13) ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Sourabh Sonwani, Advocate For State/respondent No. 12 : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Agrawal, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 14. 07.2025 1. The petitioners have filed this petition against the order dated 09.06.2025 passed by 1st Civil Judge, Senior Division, Gharghoda, District Raigarh in Civil Execution Case No. 02/2016, whereby, an application moved by the petitioners under Section 47 of CPC has been rejected. 2. The facts of the present case are respondent No. 1/plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title and possession over the suit land bearing survey No. 455/6 admeasuring 0.032 hectare. The suit was dismissed vide judgment dated 05.02.2015. A regular appeal was preferred by the plaintiff and it was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 07.01.2016. The learned appellate Court directed defendants No. 1 & 2 to hand over the possession of the suit property to the plaintiff within a period of two months and also declared the joint right of the plaintiff and defendants No. 3 to 11 over the suit property. Second appeal was preferred by the petitioners and it was dismissed vide judgment dated 08.09.2022. 3 3. The plaintiff filed an application for execution before the learned executing Court and in that proceeding, the petitioners moved an application under Section 47 of CPC raising grounds that survey No. 455/6 is government land and an order was passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer in the year 2007 against the decree holder. It is also stated that the plaintiff had filed a suit claiming the right over encroached government land. The petitioners further stated that without demarcation of the suit land, the decree cannot be executed. The learned trial Court vide order dated 09.06.2025 rejected the application. Against the said order, this petition has been preferred. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the suit land is government land and this fact is evident from the orders passed by the revenue authorities. He would further submit that the plaintiff has no right to claim title or possession over encroached government land. He would also submit that the learned Executing Court ought to have conducted an enquiry in this regard. He would contend that the order passed by the learned Executing Court may be set-aside. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on the record. 7. The suit filed by the plaintiff for declaration of title and possession over survey No. 455/6 admeasuring 0.032 hectare was dismissed. The learned first appellate Court decreed the suit vide judgment and decree dated 07.01.2016 and directed the petitioners to hand over the possession within a period of two months. Second appeal preferred by the petitioners was dismissed vide judgment dated 08.09.2022. 8. It is a well-settled principle of law that the Executing Court has to follow the judgment and decree passed by the concerned Court and it cannot go 4 beyond the decree. As there is a specific decree against the petitioners to hand over the possession of the suit property to the decree-holder and further that the said judgment and decree has attained finality; therefore, no case is made out for interference. 9. Accordingly, the instant petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant