 Good evening and amongst us we have the V. Meenakshi Sundaram, advocate in Madurai Bench Madras High Court, and he is also a resource person in the academies as well as otherwise also. He is very keen to take topics, but one topic when we are connected with him, he said it's quite close to him regarding the claim petitions and obstruction petitions in the execution proceedings. As we all know that day in and day out we need in various judgments that it's easy to get a decree, but to enjoy the fruits of the decree, it is a task to get into it, to understand as to how once you enjoy, once you get the fruit, how you actually enjoy it, is the basic, the pet and substance of the today's session, and we are too glad that V. Meenakshi Sundaram, who is a young advocate, but full of knowledge, who has accepted our invite, over to you Meenakshi Sundaram, we are too glad that you've accepted our invite. Yeah. I'm going to start. Yes. Good evening to one and all. Whether I'm audible? Yes. Good evening to one and all. Today, I must start this discussion by giving you two thanking notes first. First, I must thank the organizers to give this opportunity to present my first lecture, or I can say the first discussion class in this topic. Second thing, I know this is not an off topic for a Saturday evening. I know all my young friends are very busy, and it is the only leisure hour in the entire weekend for an advocate that knowing well, you all are ready to spend next few minutes with me on this topic. With these two thanking notes, I believe I can start this discussion session, and I request you all don't take it as a lecture session, and it is only a discussion. And now, I will start with this topic. Today's topic is climb petitions and obstruction petitions in execution proceedings. Why have chosen this topic once an invite is from the organizers? Why have chosen this topic is for two main reasons. Now, the new era or in this new era digital world, whether any changes or any amendments are necessary to this particular subject matters, that is climb petitions and obstruction petitions in civil litigation, particularly in execution site. That is the first thing always comes to our mind whenever we approach the subject. And second thing, why have chosen this topic is, whenever this type of applications are filed. See, normally I start from the normal opinion among the last students is that they leave the entire 21 chapter, it is order 21 in their choice. If you come to a new entrant in the legal profession, they never have any acquaintance with the portfolio of execution site in even in the trial court. Even for seniors, they find it very difficult when they face this type of climb application and obstruction applications before the bench. And even in the appellate side, when the advocates in the appellate side, file applications like CRPs and miscellaneous appeal as against these type of climb petitions and obstruction petitions, they find it very difficult at least to get a first impression before the bench about the case involved in this merits in this climb or obstruction petitions. And normally we are day in and day out. We are getting judgments that as my learned friend said, in India, the real litigation starts only after obtaining a degree. See, normally I say, I discuss in a civil litigation, obtaining a degree or getting a degree is not the climax. I can say it is only an interval. The real flame or the real villains, the real tan and twist starts only in the execution site. Therefore, these 106 rules in order 21 and more particularly this climb applications and this obstructions applications are very, very important topic in the execution site. Therefore, I have chosen this topic and it is a discussion. Let us start this discussion. See, when we say it is a climb applications, immediately it goes back or it relates to attachments and the climb applications are filed under order 21 to 58. Normally, immediately whenever we say there is a climb, it relates to attachments of an immobile properties in an execution petition which is mainly filed with a degree for immobile property or a degree which can be satisfied by attaching and bringing an immobile property for sale. Therefore, when we start discussing about climb application in order 21 rule 58, the first thing which we have to understand is what is the attachment in the immobile properties. If it is an attachment, then again there is an attachment before judgment and an attachment in the execution site. Now, for a minute, let us take what are all the methods of execution regarding an immobile property or to satisfy a degree like money degree, what are all the methods therein to satisfy a degree through procedures in an execution. Let us start from that point. Normally, if a immobile property is taken for sale, it is only through an attachment is our understanding. Whether it is completely correct? The answer is in order 21 rule 11 subclass 2. If you look into it, the execution petitions can be filed for attachments or for attachment and sale or a sale without attachment. Therefore, the main point is that an attachment is necessary only to have the satisfaction of a degree or to guarantee the degree holder or a client that if he succeeds, if it is an attachment before judgment, if he succeeds or in an execution site or in the execution stage, if he wants to execute a degree, this attachment or availability of the property for satisfying a degree is the main process where an attachment is necessary. The next important provision is section 64, which speaks that any private alienation after an order of attachment is void. Always we stop that and we say that all the private alienations but the section ends with these words. All such transactions shall be void as against all claims enforceable under this attachment. Therefore, it is not so that all the private alienations after attachment of the court in attachment before judgment or in this type of attachment in the execution site is completely void. It is void regarding all claims regarding that attachment. This is why a person who got right in the property before attachment or a person who got some interest in the property attached by the court can file a client application under order 21 rule 58. I can say that it is a hard bit because always in a civil litigation up to degree the court will concentrate only between the rights of two parties, plaintiffs and defendants. When the degree is put in execution only in that circumstances how that degree affects the third party and how the third party rights can be adjudicated in the execution site. These are all very important and one of that main important hard bits such provision is order 21 rule 58. If you look into that provision it starts with the word order 21 rule 58. The heading says adjudication of claims to or objections to attachment of property. See, first I said that even an execution application can be filed for attachment or for attachment and sale or for sale without attachment. But this claim application order 21 rule 58 starts. It is an adjudication of claims or objections to the attachment of property. Why I am saying this is this petition first we have to look into the subsection when this application has to be entered. What are all the circumstances when these applications can be thrown out in shill and what is the importance of this provisions which protects the right of a third party in having interest in this property which was attached by the court. Because section 64 read with order 21 rule 58 always these two provisions has to be read together because 64 specifically says any alienation after attachment is void as far as all claims regarding that attachment. And if it's so, a third party who has some interest before or during or after this attachment can only apply under order 21 and rule 58 and it is right crystallized and this is one of such important provisions. And if you look into this provisions first the more important thing is these application under order 21 rule 58 can be entertained only when the property attached was not sold in the execution process. Therefore 21 rule 58 application is not entertainable if the execution stage is after the auction in the execution process. First, second there is a ground B which specifically says when this objection was designed for an unnecessary delay. This is a prima facie ground by reading the objection applications or attachment application under order 21 rule 58. The court even without sending notices or without hearing the other side even by hearing the petitioner who has filed this attachment can easily come to one conclusion whether it has been designed to unnecessarily delay the execution. What is the main theme behind this unnecessarily delay in design? There are some illustrations. If a climb application is filed at the instance of a judgment by a puppet person or through another person who is having no iota of interest just without any evidence or without any prima facie right or a document supporting his climb. If he finds an attachment climb application then it had to be rejected under these provisions that is under order 21 rule 58 proviso subclass B. These are all two prima facie provisions, prima facie thing which we have to first understand that 21 58 can be rejected on these two grounds even at the entry stage. Then what are all the questions that can be decided under order 21 rule 58? The subclass 2 specifically says right the all questions which includes right title or interest in the property attached therefore even if a iota of interest for third parties there in the property I can say to this level this climb application can be filed even by a person holding an agreement a legally enforceable sale agreement who is given a substantial amount of an advance even though he is a person who is not having any title in this that property he is having some interest by giving an advance under the sale agreement he is a person having some interest in the property even he can file an application under order 21 rule 58 to safeguard his right regarding this property attached as far as the amount which he has paid as an advance in his sale agreement these are all here right how the right of a third party to a degree is saved under order 21 rule 58 is one of such illustration and such adjudication can be made and orders if you see class number 3 it says it can allow the climb and release the property from attachment either wholly or to such extent as it is fit then the next doubt comes what to an extent as it is fit I will give an illustration if a property is attached in an excuse and say stage a property of a judgment that is attached and a climb application is filed by a person who is having some amount of share in that property and he is able to establish even though it is a property purchased in the name of judgment that are the source for purchase is the family fund and I am one of the family member and I am also having some share in that property and my share is quantified to this extent then to that extent his climb or objection can be adjudicated and to that extent the attachment can be lifted or it can be released and that is why it says it can release the property from attachment either wholly or to an extent such extent as it is fit next it can disallow the climb or objection I want to make a point at this level if we all see the proviso clause to order 21 rule 58 subclass B and this B that this B specifically said it has to adjudicate the attachment climb petition and it has to disallow the climb or objection but even before adjudication there is a clause which says it can consider the object it can reject if the climb or objection was designed to for an unnecessarily delay no such climb application can be entertained that is at the initial stage even at the initial stage under the proviso clause the application need not be entertained but after entertaining that application after adjudicating upon the climb application or the objection application even that application can be disallowed these are all two stages where there can be a rejection and disallowing or a dismissal it is after adjudication and the third thing is subclass C specifically says it can continue the attachment subject to any mortgage, charge or any other interest in favor of any person this is more interesting I will give an illustration how such an order or such an adjudication can be made and such a result can also be there in an climb application filed under 21 rule 58 normally if a party comes to under this application before an execution court he says that I have obtained a prior degree or I am a prior mortgage or it is a property mortgage to a secured creditor or there can be another application filed by a person who has already got a charge over this property whenever such applications are filed it is not necessary for the execution court to release the property from attachment absolutely the parties who got prior mortgage a secured creditor a person who got a prior charge or a person who already got a prior attachment if they approach this execution court and file a climb application regarding attachment made in the present case then it is not necessary for the court execution court to allow that application and raise the attachment it can pause orders under subclass C to the effect that this is the attachment which can continue subject to that prior mortgage it can continue subject to that prior charge because it is this provision is there only to adjudicate upon a valuable objections and there must be a waiving parallely the right of a degree holder who is also before the court execution court fighting for implementation or satisfaction of this degree therefore if a person comes with a climb application with this particular types of climbs the execution court may not release that property from attachment on the ground that it is a secured creditor it can pause orders that this attachment in this execution can continue subject to the attachment or the right of a prior mortgage or I can say that any person who got charge prior charge over this property and the fourth ground is still more interesting it can pause any such order as in the circumstances of the case it deems fit gives a wide power to the execution court under order 21 rule 58 what is such a wide power what are all the circumstances I think as an illustration I will give an illustration on this point if a climb application is filed by a bona fide purchaser in the execution proceedings wherein there is an attachment and his bona fide purchase is absolutely after the attachment order in the execution site then absolutely as per operation of 64 his alienation as far as climbs regarding the attached property is void but there is a prior counter by the judgment data before the court or I can say that there is some undertaking by a judgment data to the effect that he is having no intention for such alienation before pausing an order of attachment or he says some undertaking has been given then the court can pause any such further orders to maintain not only to maintain or to sustain the order of attachment but it can also pause any such further orders if the circumstances warrants to save even the right of a third party who filed an application under order 21 rule 58 therefore it is a permission where there is a complete adjudication of a right of a third party or a title or interest of a third party towards an attachment in the execution site and subclass 4 of our 21 rule 58 very specifically speaks that any of such orders which was passed under ABCD of the subclass 3 then it amounts to as it were a degree and it is appealable it specifically speaks where any claim or objection has been adjudicated upon under this rule an order made there on shall have the same force and be subject to the same condition as to the appeal or otherwise as it were a degree therefore only as I said in my earlier discussion in subclass 3 what are all the orders types of orders that can be passed on the adjudication of attachment attachment client petition the orders or the adjudication is a complete adjudication of a right of a third party regarding an attachment and the degree holder right for getting satisfaction of the degree and the right of the judgment data in the property attached therefore it becomes a complete adjudication and that is why subclass 4 specifically speaks it has an effect of a degree and it is a degree with effect of an degree and it is an appealable order that is subclass 4 and if we come to subclass 5 the proviso that is why I have insisted that it reads where a claim or an objection is preferred and the court under the proviso to sub rule 1 refuses to entertain it there is a great difference of disallowing or dismissal under subclass B of class 3 of order 21 rule 58 and refuse to entertain under proviso class B of order 21 rule 58 there is a great difference that is why the importance comes to subclass 5 where a claim or an objection is preferred and the court under the proviso to sub rule 1 refuses to entertain it the party against whom such an order is made may institute a suit to establish the right which he climbs to the property in dispute but subject to the result of such suit if any in order so refusing to entertain the claim or objection shall be concluded this is how it has been the legislature started fit very wisely even at that point of time if an application is filed under this proviso order 21 rule 58 the execution court comes to a conclusion that it cannot be entertained even at the initial stage and it said it was designed to unnecessarily delay the execution and it rejected the adjudication process itself then the remedy for such a person is to file a separate suit the remedy is not closed he can file a separate suit for adjudication of his rights and this rejection initial rejection under 21 rule 58 subclass 1 proviso subclass B will not come in the way of filing a separate suit to adjudicate his right and this order of rejection becomes conclusive only subject to the result in that suit so this is how order 21 rule 58 becomes a complete code by itself regarding the climb of right title and interest of any person in the property attached and I can say that it is something like a whole episode more than a suit it is that is how it is very important at the stage of execution now let us have a minute discussion or minute thought whether this provision needs a change see why I insist for this thought process is a normal opinion among the entire judicial field is that every application in the execution side is a stomping block for deregulation it is designed only to delay and to have a bad impression upon this civil litigating system this is how the opinion has been developed in this past I can say 25 to 40 years but we look into this and if we have the entire discussion on this 21 58 I can take you to various provisions regarding entire 106 rules but if you read this 5 subclasses of 21 58 I can say it is a complete code by itself it is having such a protection and such a great vision to decide or to have an adjudication of any person who claims right for example I will also put it in this way we have come across a very latest many enactments in many other fields for example if you take surfasi surfasi is a complete code by itself and it was coming to force it was introduced only for a very quick disposal of a commercial litigation with PAC when there are high pin APAs and then there is a great recovery problem in that side it affects the entire nation and it affects the development of the nation and that is the vision for which the surfasi act has been enacted and was introduced even now my dear friends if you look into surfasi if you look into the process of auction in surfasi even the essence of these provisions are there even these type of applications are now imaginable or it is there are provisions in surfasi to have a client in the property which was there brought for sale therefore 2158 according to me it is a very important provision in the execution stage and without this an execution of a degree result in great injustice to a third party who is completely not aware of these litigation see always we come across the civil code degrees or judgment or degree in persona only when it is put to execution when there is an attachment when it comes to a limelight or having reflected in EC or when it comes for delivery to the actual present field the third party who is there in possession or a party who is having a valuable right or a party who is having an interest in that property will get knowledge of these proceedings and these provisions are correct provisions wherein their right can be attributed and it is I can say these provisions are by it is I can say that it is a complete code and it gives a drizzle of grievance of the entire third parties who claim rights and that is how the legislature thought it fit to give discretion and to assess whether such an application is even at the preliminary stage therefore if the execution code strictly follow these norms and go by these provisions there will not be any delay and real justice will be rendered in the execution side on this process even an applying application is filed in the property attached for a satisfaction of a degree and the next important provision is 2158 capital A which specifically speaks that the reflection of any order passed for attachment or for raising the attachment or releasing a part of it any order passed that has to be reflected before the ministering authority putting the entire world on a public notice that is how 58A is very much important it is an amendment which was made in 1987 therefore this is the introduction of a client application and I can say the next important provision if you look into 58 up to 60 there is complete it is a complete code where it answers all the circumstances I can say it answers all the circumstances where these client applications are fight and next important topic is the obstruction applications I can say it is a lengthy topic both this obstructions and client application in the execution side is a white topic when we go into it it gets more deeper and there are many minute points for discussion therefore I take this first opportunity to have an introduction to all the persons here in this platform to have a discussion see this is not the correct impression about the client application in the execution side and I want to discuss and break that image or opinion that is how I have taken this topic and I am making an attempt to that effect if you look into the following provisions after 58 which speaks very minutely when a sale can be staged when such applications are filed and even if you look into that the process of making proclamations and everything it flows when a client application is filed and if the court feels if on another side if the court proceeds with the auction of the attached property the person who comes with the client application his rights even if he is going to succeed in the end of the adjudication if the property is sold simultaneously it will affect and the third party right and that is how order 21 rule 29 was enacted and it is also a more important provisions now let us come into obstruction petitions the word obstruction itself is having some negative as the obstruction I can say it is one another important provision in the execution side order 21 rule 97 up to 105 again it comes as a complete code if you look into these provisions very closely I can say it is another full code having a full match it decides the rights and I can say that 21 rule 97 interestingly starts with the word giving right to the degree holder who are within degree for delivery any person who got right in the execution proceedings or purchaser under the execution side go and gets for delivery if he was obstructed or resisted he can come back to the court and he can complain that he is having such obstructions and get the help of the court to remove that obstructions this is how the wordings of 9127 starts for a minute I will read 9127 and how it has been given a different interpretation how it has there been a march of law for the past 30 years in this field it starts with the word 97 rule 97 of order 21 starts with the word where the holder of a degree for the possession of an immobile property or the purchaser of any such property sold in execution of a degree there are two class of persons one is the holder of the degree or the person of purchaser of such property sold in the execution of the degree is resisted or obstructed by any person in obtaining the possession of the property he may make an application to the court complying of such resistance or obstructions this is order 21 rule 57 actually it is a complaint given by the degree holder or a purchaser who got right in the property in the execution it means going for a delivery of the property if he was resisted or obstructed in the process of taking delivery it can be complained to the execution court and he can pray for removal of resistance of such resistance or obstructions let us now get into what is this process how there will be a complaint see always in a practical point of view if there is an execution warrant or delivery warrant if a court obtains go there for an execution or a delivery of that warrant normally if it is a judgment doctor who is there in the possession he will lock it will be the normal advice he will lock the premises or he will have some other persons there to obstruct his own servants there to obstruct and he will obstruct the amin and the amin will come back to the execution court files an amin report saying that it was door lock or it cannot be taken delivery because of the judgment doctor's servants obstructions and he will seek for police protections and other behavioral health and survey health etc at this stage why I am insisting is always in this side of execution we skip this important process of amin's report we take it very lightly and we we pass on with that it is just a report which will have an automatic order of police protection automatic order of break open and everything why I am insisting here is it is only based upon the amin's report the execution court prime officer at the first instance get the knowledge what is the resistance for execution of the delivery ward and there comes the importance of the amin's report if the amin specifically make a note that it is a resistance by a third party and he climbs such and such right and he is obstructing the warrant of delivery of this possession of this property that becomes the prime officer first report before the execution court to get the knowledge of such resistance even without waiting for an application from the degree holder side by perusing the amin's report the court can issue notice to such a third party abstractor and ask him to come to the execution court and answer what is the merit of his resistance or objections or obstructions in the execution of this delivery ward that is how the amin's report plays a vital role at this execution stage nowadays at passage of practice I can say that it becomes a very lighter when it becomes we allot these jobs to clubs our clubs and they are taking note of all these things and applications are filing the type performance but it becomes more important and the march of law in this particular provisions went to an extent that it is not only a degree holder it is not only the purchaser who got right in the property sold in the execution even the resistant party or the party who obstructed the execution can come and file an application saying that I am the person who is in this delivery ward warrant and I am having a merit in my case for obstructing this delivery ward and he can put forth his valuable claim and it can be get it aggregated under 2197 I must quote one interesting latest judgment which says that that party who is in possession cannot file an application in 2197 and such application need not be interpreted the latest judgment please take note of it 2022 4 CTC 278 it is Sriram housing finance limited this is Omesh Misra Memorial Trust it is specifically on this point and it specifically speaks the provision particularly gives right only to the degree holder and it is only a complaint for removing such a resistance or an obstructions and therefore a third party who is there in possession and who is obstructing such delivery cannot file such an application with great respect it is on the Supreme Court judgment of latest judgment I can say this this judgment has not referred many other previous judgments and I quote these two judgments for kind consideration of all the viewers please read these two judgments which is having a contra view 1998 3 CTC 723 and a very latest judgment after this 2022 is which speaks about the right of parties who can file applications under this provisions 2197 even before obstructing the delivery or even before removing them from the possession the judgment latest judgment is 2023 MW1 Civil 117 it is the latest reported judgment of Honourable Supreme Court maintainability of obstruction application even by a party who is there in possession climbing independent right under order 2127 if these two judgments are considered along with 2022 4 CTC 728 that is Sriram housing finance it can be easily we can easily come to an conclusion 2197 can be filed even by a person who obstruct the execution or the delivery of a property and now we come back to the provisions because this is the March of law which I want to discuss with you all that even though the provisions specifically speak giving right or request to two set of persons that is the degree holder or a person who purchase the property in the process of execution but it can be also filed the obstructor also and the second important thing is the power of the execution court even without waiting for a complaint or an application under this provision from a degree holder even by perusing the Amin's report if you get knowledge prima facie information about the details of the obstructors then it can issue notice and call for that obstructor to present what are all the merits in his obstructions again these provisions have the next important orders for attribution as like that of subclass 3 of order 21 rule 58 order 21 rule 98 speaks about what are all the orders that can be passed when such application resistance comes from a third party or if a complaint by a degree holder under order 21 rule 57 21 98 starts upon determination of the question referred to under order 101 rule 101 the court shall in accordance with such determination and subject to provisions of sub rule 2 make an order allowing the application and directing the applicant be put into the possession of the property or dismissing the application again now the march of law under 21 97 and the types of orders that can be passed under 21 98 it specifically seeks it can make an order of allowing the application and directing the applicant be put into the possession of the property it specifically have a connection regarding the march of law under 21 97 which I discussed with you all see if the petition is going to be allowed then the applicant will be put into possession of that property particularly it speaks about the right of the resistor or the obstructor back to the possession of the property that is why by giving an interpretation to this rule there is a march of law even under 21 97 the applicant who is obstructing can also file an application and the result of allowing the application his application will directly give the result that he will be backed into the possession of that property or his possession already there will be confirmed second part is it can dismiss such an application so what I want to say is 21 97 21 98 and 21 101 if you read these three provisions it specifically says it is a complete adjudication of a right of a third party who comes in the way of delivery and the second class which specifically says as it gives a description to the court execution court in the adjudication of this obstruction application is to pass any such orders as circumstances of the case it may deems fit and in illustration for such occasion to come is that if the party who is obstructing that is a tenant and he is obstructing the delivery of that property to an extent of his right of tenancy then the conclusion of this application obstruction application may to the extent of removing him and put the degree holder in possession equally saving his right of tenancy his right of advance his right of atonement of tenancy even by degree holder who comes forward with the application or to take delivery so such types of orders can also be passed when such resistance or obstructions are there for an example if the tenant is there he obstructs the delivery the degree holder complies about that obstruction or a tenant by himself he files an obstruction application for delivery of such noble property then the execution court can adjudicate upon that application and pass any such orders in the circumstances of the case deems things fit he can pass orders if the degree holder who comes forward can aton his tenancy under him by getting more amount of rent or with additional deposit such an orders can be passed regarding a symbolic delivery and giving a right of tenancy a new tenancy or he can be removed from the possession and degree holder can be put into the possession by passing in appropriate order of protecting the right of a tenant at least to an extent of his advance amount see such orders can be passed even under this obstruction application and such powers can be given in order 21 to 98 and second is more important upon such determination the court is satisfied that the obstruction or resistance has occasioned without any just cause by the judgment data or by some other person at his instigation or on his pickup or by any transvery please make an emphasis of the word any transvery because you have a direct link with rule 102 where such transfer was made during the pendency of the suit or execution proceedings it shall direct the appellant be put into possession of the property and the applicant is still resisted or obstructed in obtaining possession the court may also at the instance of the applicant order the judgment data or any person acting at his instigation or on his pickup to be detained in civil prison for a term which may extend to 30 days see why I insist upon this provision is keeping aside for a moment now let us come to 102 for a minute and come back to this rule 2 of order 21 to 98 rule 102 specifically speaks these rules are not applicable to transvery pendency it read let us like this nothing in rules 98 and 100 shall apply to resistance or obstruction in execution of a degree for the possession of removal property by a person to whom the judgment data has transferred the property after the institution of the suit in which the degree was passed or to the dispossession of any person see this particular rule 102 specifically bars and the explanation class specifically says transfer includes any transfer by operation of law also it specifically bars such an obstruction cannot be made by a transvery pendency by the judgment data if you read subclass 2 of order 21 rule 98 it also specifically speaks about the obstruction if it is caused by the judgment data or any person at his instigation or any transvery from the judgment data such obstructions has to be removed and still if the objections continues the execution court is having the power to detain them in civil prison without an application to that extent if for detention in civil prison even if there is no prior such power has been given under subclass 2 of order 21 rule 98 and next important provision is dispossession by degree holder or purchaser it is one another important provision which specifically speaks where any person other than the judgment data is dispossessed of immobile property by a holder of a degree why I am insisting is as the march of law specifically speaks 21 97 gives right even to a person who is obstructing that march of law comes only from 21 99 it gives a harsh step that if an obstructor is a third party and he is obstructing with some independent right 99 speaks that he must lose the possession he must give the way for the degree holder to take the delivery and thereafter apply to the execution court under 99 and prove his merit and if he succeed he can get an order as provided under sub rule 1 of order 21 rule 98 that the applicant has to be put again in the possession of the property the word applicant used under order 21 rule 98 subclass 1 is the person who lost the possession under 99 and he comes to the court I have lost the possession in the delivery warrant and the property was delivered to the degree holder but still I am having a valid merit in my obstruction and if his merits in the obstruction is proved to be correct and if his application is allowed such order will make him again to put into the possession as provided under sub rule 1 of order 21 rule 98 by giving this interpretation of 21 97 order 28 subclass 1 and 21 99 there is a march of law even before losing the possession the obstructor can file an application under 21 97 and get his right to be educated and that is why I insisted the amends report and in the process of taking delivery or reporting obstructions to the execution court is very much necessary and that difficulty of losing possession or giving out the way to take delivery and thereafter come under rule 99 can be avoided by a correct amends report filed before the court complying what is the obstructions or at least to an extent of details of the identity of the obstructor and next is more important is I can say order 21 rule 101 what are all the questions that can be decided it gives a wild power to the execution court to decide what are all the questions that can be decided and that is how I have made my presentation to this extent that 21 97 up to 21 105 itself is a complete court and it decides more than a suit it gives an adjudication it gives a result more than a suit adjudication and a degree between the party 21 101 specifically speaks it can decide all questions including the questions related to right title or interest in the property arising between the parties to the proceeding on an application under rule 97 or 99 or their representatives and relevant to the adjudication of the application I request all my friends please have a look with an attachment objection application 21 58 where also specifically speaks about right title or interest of an object or person who is objecting the attachment here 21 101 speaks about again the word used is right title or any interest in the property which is going to be taken delivery between the parties to the proceeding under 97 or 99 it speaks if the degree holder who won't complain under 97 or a person obstructing the delivery can also those rights can be decided under 101 and it can it shall be determined by the court dealing with an application and the next word is very important not by way of a separate suit therefore the emphasis is more there in 101 if it is not by way of a separate suit the whole provision from 21 97 up to 21 105 dealing with all these rights in taking delivery itself something very equal to a suit proceeds the person obstructing cannot file a separate suit a degree holder who is obstructed by a third party cannot complain and cannot go for a separate suit everything can be done in this execution stage even under 21 97 and up to 21 105 next important provision is rule 104 which specifically speaks that the order made under these provisions on the adjudication of these obstructions application is to be subject to the result of a pending suit see that is how these provisions answers all circumstances it answers all the circumstances 104 specifically says every order made under rule 101 or 103 shall be subject to the result of any suit that may be pending on the date of commencement of these proceedings in which such order is made and if in such suit the party against whom the order under rule 101 or rule 103 is made has sought to be established a right which he claims to be the present process of the property see for an illustration if a third party who stands in the way of taking delivery who obstruct the delivery has filed a separate suit proceedings already as against the judgment data and that is there in the adjudication process and the degree holder in the present suit comes for the delivery the obstruction application in this obstruction application for for an illustration the obstructions found to be no merit and the abstract was removed from the possession and the degree holder was put into the possession in the process of the delivery of removed property but at the instigation at the initial stage of the obstruction application and the independent suit is pending at the instant of the very same abstract as against the judgment data in this suit he filed here to prove the merits or his complying about his independent right was considered and dismissed but in that suit he was able to succeed this result is subject to the result of that suit and the suit has to be pending on the date of the initial point of these proceedings because the previous rule specifically speaks such right cannot be ventilated by way of a separate suit when it forms an obstruction in the process of delivery so the independent suit which was there mentioned in rule 104 is to be pending at the initial stage of complying obstruction under rule 2197 or 99 therefore if such suit is pending this result is always subject to the degree going to be passed in that suit if there is no suit is pending the abstract cannot file a separate suit he can only ventilate under these provisions that is why in the initial stage of this discussion I said that 2197 to 105 2158 it is a complete code and it cannot be revisited with any amendment I can say that even under 76 2002 there are amendments to order 21 only to make it more strengthened or to have a transparency and there is no great change or there is no more amendments under order 21 it has not undergone a great change even from 1908 even after amendment in 76 and 2002 that is how it becomes more important in the process of execution stage and my humble opinion is 2198 climate publications and 2197 to 105 these two chapters mainly decides the grievance of a third party out of the game because he was not there in your game up to the process of getting degree if such third party rights are having merits and if they are relegated to a separate suit proceedings it will leads to multiplicity of proceedings and cross degrees that is how these provisions are enacted and these two applications which mainly concerns about the valuable right of a third party is more important and without this the execution proceedings will leads to grave injustice and I conclude this discussion class and I thank every one of you to spend your valuable time in this Saturday evening and it is only an introduction in future we will have an entire discussion in a very detailed manner regarding these two chapters thank you Onalav thank you Avijak is checking out as to whether we have any questions there is only one question on the youtube it says how a claim petition can be filed in case of warrant of position you will have to unmute yourself yes there is only one question how can a claim petition be filed in case of warrant of position that is how time application can be filed regarding the warrant of position even under 2197 that the property is ordered to be delivered then if you are having a valuable right you can file a resistance application even under 2197 read with 2158 see these two provisions mainly connected with the right of a third party climbing right in the process of taking process of the execution by attachment and sale the delivery of property I will give some important judgments to the organizers to post it particularly on this topic yeah the next question is can a third party file a claim in the execution of a partition suit definitely if the partition suit the execution comes after final degree and after final degree if any third party if you are not a transfer as immigrated under order to rule 102 if you are having a separate right independent right because I can say that mostly if a third party property is included in a partition suit and everybody will be happy in getting partition of a third party suit nobody will reveal that it is a third party property even that may happen and there are circumstances where institutions are having prior rights and by getting a revenue but individuals will find partition suit among themselves and get a degree in such circumstances the parties who are having a prior valuable right even can file an application in a partition suit and actually in the execution proceedings of a partition suit it is only for a delivery of a final degree the last question is what is the basic difference between order 21 rule 98 subclass 2 and order 21 rule 102 the basic difference is the subclass 2 specifically it includes everyone if subclass 2 specifically says if at the end of the adjudication of 2197 if the execution code comes to an conclusion such an obstruction is made only at the instigation of a judgment data or it is by a transwery from a judgment data then it can remove that obstruction even going to an extent of making an order to be detained this will present to remove that obstruction but 102 specifically speaks to reject initially if it is an application obstructions, applications filed by a transwery potentiality see when party comes and he says that I purchased the property only from the judgment data but I am a bona fide purchaser see if it is a purchased fending litigation even by an operation of law that is an explanation class 2 rule 102 even if he is a purchaser from a judgment data or by an operation of law fending this litigation such application can be thrown out even without numbering under 102 but 98 subclass 2 says at the end of an adjudication the court comes to a conclusion that it is only at the instigation of the judgment data by a transwery then it can go to an extent of removing that obstruction even by making an order of detention 7% whether an application for execution petition can be reopened in a case where satisfaction of the execution has been recorded by the executing court definitely that is why if you see even after recording the delivery that is why please read 99 rule 99 specifically speaks that if there is an obstrector but the Amin's files report that delivery was taken it is a wrong report and go by that the execution court recorded a delivery and close the EP then the obstrector who is there in the possession was thrown out illegally by the Amin's report come back to the very same execution court and complain that my obstructions was not duly noted and I am having a merit in my obstruction the recording of delivery by this Honourable Court is wrong and he can file an application and yet his merit of this obstruction to be adjudicated even 99 speaks about an application after losing the possession so thank you Archie for sharing your insights Archie and the way people have loved it from the YouTube I am quite sure that this journey will come soon Thank you everyone