Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:121801 Court No. - 9 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 7599 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sharda Devi Respondent :- Smt. Savitri Devi (Since Deceased) And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Amish Kumar Srivastava,Jeetendra Kesharwani Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1.Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is permitted to make correction in the array of parties during course of the day. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. 4. This petition has been filed for the following relief: "To set aside the order dated 31.05.2025 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gorakhpur in Execution Case No. 20 of 2016 in between Smt. Savitri Versus Babu Lal (Annexure No. of the petition) with regard to the House No. 0261 E, situate in mohalla Humayupur, District Gorakhpur." 5. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that original suit no. 232 of 1974 was filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants in the suit, for the relief of injunction as well as possession. The said suit was decreed on 01.09.1982. First appeal filed by the defendants in the suit was dismissed in the year 1991 against which the defendants filed second appeal which was also dismissed in the year 2013, thereafter, a decree was put to execution in the year 2016 in which an amin report has been submitted on 17.03.2025 and thereafter an order dated 31.05.2025 has been passed for execution of the decree with the help of police. It has been further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was neither party in the suit nor in the execution proceedings and as such decree is not binding on the petitioner. It has been further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the amin report, the house of the petitioner is shown. The petitioner is in occupation of the house in her independent rights and is not claiming the rights through the defendants in the suit. It has also been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that in pursuance to the order impugned, the constructions of the petitioner are liable to be demolished. It has been further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that though the petitioner can file an application under Order 41 Rule 97 read with Rule 99 C.P.C. claiming independent rights over the property in dispute but there is an imminent threat of dispossession during the period in which the application is to be filed. 6. I am of the view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending and the petitioner is permitted to move an application under Order 41 Rule 97 read with 99 C.P.C. for establishing the claim within a week along with an application for interim relief. 7. In case, such an application along with an application for interim relief, is filed, the application for interim relief shall be considered and decided by the executing court i.e. Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), District Gorakhpur in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order after ensuring service upon all the parties concerned and after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties provided that there is no other legal impediment. 8. It is further provided that for a period of eight weeks, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner. 9. It is made clear that this Court has not examined the case on merits and the same shall be considered and decided by the executing court without being influenced by any of the findings recorded by this Court. Order Date :- 24.7.2025 Ved Prakash (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- VED PRAKASH SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad