Court No. 6 (265719) 17.08.2026 (AD 13) (S. Banerjee) CO 2586 of 2026 Sri Tapan Kumar Das @ Tapan Das Vs. Sri Asish Chatterjee & Anr. Mr. Sabyasachi Mukherjee Mr. Ranabeer Halder Mr. Tapan Jyoti Basu Mr. Mukesh Khanra …for the petitioner This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the judgment-debtor and is directed against an order being no. 9 dated July 21, 2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), 2nd Court at Barasat, North 24 Parganas in Title Execution Case No. 6 of 2026. By the order impugned the application filed by the judgment-debtor/petitioner herein for compelling the decree-holder to adduce evidence in the execution case, stood rejected. Record reveals that the Court Bailiff was examined in chief and fully cross-examined on June 20, 2026 and the said Bailiff has categorically deposed that he visited the suit property and faced resistance during execution of the writ for which he was unable to execute the writ without police assistance. 2 The dispute arose as to whether there was resistance at the time of execution of the writ. The learned Judge of the executing court was right in observing that burden of leading evidence rests upon the party who seeks to establish his case and such party is the best judge as to how the case has to be proved. It further appears from the record that the judgment-debtor got an opportunity to cross-examine the said Bailiff. The Bailiff has already deposed that there was resistance at the time of execution of the writ. Thus, non-examination of the Decree Holder is not fatal in the instant case. For such reason, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order impugned. Accordingly, this civil revision application stands dismissed without, however, any order as to costs. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)