P&H: Execution of decree kept in abeyance amid on allegation of fraud based on subsequent consolidation and revenue record until the competent Court decides validity of the decree

(i) Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.10 — Stay of subsequent suit — On the one hand revision has arisen out of an order passed in execution and on other hand seeks adjudication upon validity of judgment and decree itself on allegations that decree was obtained...

(ii) Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.21.R.32(5) — Execution — Restoration of possession —There is no absolute legal impediment to restoration of possession in execution of decree for injunction, where decree-holder establishes that he was dispossessed subsequent to decree but O.21.R.32(5)  enable Executing Court to restore...

(iii) Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.21.R.35 — Execution — Executing Court cannot declare decree inexecutable merely on basis of subsequent revenue record and demarcation report — Executing Court could not go behind  decree, which had attained finality, particularly when allegation that decree itself was obtained by...

(iv) Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.21.R.35 — Execution and pending challenge to decree — Where decree itself is under separate challenge on allegation of fraud based on subsequent consolidation and revenue record, immediate coercive execution, including delivery of possession, should remain in abeyance until the...