1 2025:CGHC:21320 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 1173 of 2024 1 - Tikam Prasad S/o. Tilakram Aged About 70 Years (Correctly Mentioned), Vill-Mura, Teh- Kharsia, Distt. - Raigarh (C.G.), Taluka - Kharsia, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Daulatram Urf S/o. Mohan Aged About 39 Years Vill-Mura, Teh- Kharsia, Distt. - Raigarh (C.G.), Taluka - Kharsia, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.) 2 - Dukhulal Mohan Aged About 37 Years Vill-Mura, Teh- Kharsia, Distt. - Raigarh (C.G.) 3 - Dhansai S/o. Mohan Aged About 34 Years Vill-Mura, Teh- Kharsia, Distt. - Raigarh (C.G.), Taluka - Kharsia, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.) 4 - Amritlal S/o. Mohan Aged About 31 Years Vill-Mura, Teh- Kharsia, Distt. - Raigarh (C.G.), Taluka - Kharsia, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.) 5 - Phiratram S/o. Kartikdas Dewangan Aged About 38 Years Rahaud, Teh. Pamgadh, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 6 - Badhibai W/o. Phiratram Aged About 32 Years Rahaud, Teh. Pamgadh, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 7 - Hiramati Dewangan W/o. Lt. Tilakram Aged About 82 Years Rahaud, Teh. Pamgadh, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 8 - Shri Savitri Bai W/o. Lt. Dukhulal Aged About 57 Years Vill-Mura, Teh. - Kharsia, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) 9 - Gajanand S/o. Lt. Dukhulal Aged About 35 Years Vill. - Mura, Teh. Kharsia, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.) 10 - Khem Kumari D/o. Lt. Dukhulal Aged About 35 Years R/o. Vill. Mura, Tahsil - Kharsia, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) 2 For Petitioner : Mr. Harsh Verma, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 08-05-2025 1) By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):- 10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to expedite the execution of Civil Execution Case No. 235/2018 and ensure that the judgment and decree passed by the High Court in FA No. 41 of 2002 is promptly executed within a fixed time frame. 10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to take all necessary steps for the restoration of possession of the suit property to the petitioner and evict the respondents from the property forthwith, within the specified time. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the executing Court to conclude the execution proceedings of & months Ha. within a fixed and reasonable period, and to take all measures in accordance with law to ensure that the decree holder is not deprived of the fruits of the decree for an extended period. 10.4 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner together with cost of the petition. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner/decree holder submits that a decree was passed in favor of petitioner by this Court in First Appeal No. 41 of 2002 on 08.10.2018 declaring him to be the rightful owner of the suit property. He further submits that thereafter, petitioner filed execution application before the learned Executing Court but there is not substantial progress. He contends that petitioner filed WP227 No. 320 of 2023 and vide order dated 12.04.2023, the learned Executing Court 3 was directed to expedite the execution proceedings but there is no change in circumstance. He prays that a direction may be issued to the learned Executing Court to conclude the proceedings at the earliest in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Rahul S. Shah vs. Jitendra Kumar Gandhi, 2021 (6) SCC 418. 3) Heard. 4) Having considered the limited prayer made by Mr. Verma, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Executing Court to make all endeavors to conclude the execution proceedings keeping in mind the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Rahul S. Shah (supra). 5) With the aforesaid observation(s), and direction(s), the instant petition is hereby disposed of Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Ajinkya AJINKYA PANSARE Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2025.05.08 16:17:37 +0530