1 2025:CGHC:15269 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 130 of 2019 1 - Bhuruwa Ram Sahu (Now Dead) Through Lrs Sukdev Sahu S/o Late Bhuruwaram Sahu Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Koliyadih Tahsil Kasdol District Balodabazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ........Plaintiff., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Ramshila Bai D/o Ramadhar Ganda Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Koliyadih, Tahsil Kasdol District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 2 - Sushila Bai D/o Ramadhar Ganda Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Koliyadih, Tahsil Kasdol District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 3 - Urmila Bai D/o Ramadhar Ganda Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Koliyadih, Tahsil Kasdol District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 4 - Gouri Bai D/o Ramadhar Ganda Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Koliyadih, Tahsil Kasdol District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 5 - Shivganesh S/o Ramadhar Ganda Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Koliyadih, Tahsil Kasdol District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 6 - Melaram S/o Ramadhar Ganda Aged About 18 Years R/o Village Koliyadih, Tahsil Kasdol District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 7 - Shanti Bai Widow Of Ramadhar Ganda Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Koliyadih, Tahsil Kasdol District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents __________________________________________________________ For Petitioner/Plaintiff : Mr. A.D. Kuldeep, Advocate __________________________________________________________ REKHA SINGH Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH -2- Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 01.04.2025 1. The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the First Civil Judge, Class-1 Balodabazar, in Execution Case No.08-A/1998 whereby an application moved by the original petitioner namely Bhuruwa Ram Sahu for the execution of a decree has been dismissed on the ground that it was moved after 19 years. 2. Mr. Kuldeep, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/plaintiff would submit that the original plaintiff namely, Bhuruwa Ram Sahu instituted a suit for the specific performance of contract in respect of the land bearing Survey No.2695/1 admeasuring 0.291 hectares situated at Village Hasuwa, Patwari Circle No.154, Tehsil-Kasdol, District Raipur before the Court of Civil Judge Class-1 Balodabazar. He would further submit that the suit was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 08.10.1999 and the defendants were directed to execute the sale deed in respect of the suit property in favour of the plaintiff within a period of two months. The plaintiff was directed to deposit the balance consideration of Rs. 2000/- within two months. He would contend that the original plaintiff namely Bhuruwa Ram Sahu filed an application for execution in the year 2009 and it was registered as MJC No.1/2009. During the pendency of the execution case, Bhuruwa Ram Sahu expired on 13.02.2012. He would further contend that pursuant to the judgment and decree, the original plaintiff deposited Rs.2,000/- with the learned Trial Court and this fact is evident from the order-sheet dated 08.10.2013 and 3 thereafter, the case was closed. He would also submit that after the death of the original plaintiff, his legal representatives moved an application for execution on 10.10.2018 and the same has been dismissed by the learned Trial Court on the ground that the application for execution has been moved after a lapse of 19 years. He would state that after the death of the original plaintiff, his legal representatives moved an application for execution on 10.10.2018 and it was within limitation as the earlier application was disposed of vide order dated 08.10.2013. He would contend that the learned Executing Court committed an error of law in rejecting the application moved by the petitioner for execution. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the documents placed on the record. 4. From a perusal of the order passed by the learned Executing Court dated 02.11.2018, it is apparent that on 08.10.1999 the judgment and decree was passed in favour of the plaintiff and he was directed to deposit Rs.2,000/- within a period of two months. The petitioner complied with his part and his application was disposed of. 5. A perusal of the order dated 08.10.2013 would show that it was a Miscellaneous Judicial Case whereby the original plaintiff deposited an amount of Rs.2,000/- pursuant to the judgment and decree. The application for execution was not moved at that stage. 6. The documents would further show that the application for execution was moved on 10.10.2018, and the learned Executing Court rejected it on the ground that it was moved after a lapse of -4- 19 years. 7. Considering the reasons assigned by the learned Executing Court and the facts of the present case, in the opinion of this Court, the Court concerned has not committed any error of law while rejecting the application for execution. Consequently, the present petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha