JUDGMENT 1. - The present contempt proceeding is a classic illustration of travesty of justice. 2. It is evident from perusal of the material available on S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 299 of 1994 that S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 117/93 was dismissed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 18.8.1993 and while dismissing the appeal, the judgment-debtor was allowed one year's time to vacate the suit-shop from the date of judgment i.e. 18.8.1993, provided he furnished an undertaking to the effect that he will hand-over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit-shop on or before 18.8.1994 and further that he will not part with or deliver possession of the suit shop to any other person other than landlord. 3. It is further evident from the order dated 28.9.1993 passed by the learned Single Judge that the period for submitting undertaking in terms of the order dated 8.8.1993 was extended upto 24.9.1993 on which date the judgment-debtor filed undertaking before learned Additional Civil Judge No. 2, Jodhpur. 4. Indisputably, the decree-holder has launched Execution Case No. 5 of 1993, wherein, the judgment-debtor has furnished a written undertaking before the learned Executing Court to hand-over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit-shop on or before 18.8.1994. He has also given an undertaking to fulfil other conditions in terms of the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge on 18.8.1993. 5. It is shocking to note that even after expiry of one year from 18.8.1993 in pursuant to undertaking given by judgment-debtor, the decree holder could not be able to obtain vacant and peaceful possession of the suit shop and he is running from pillar to post to obtain possession. 6. On 22.1.1997, this Court passed a detailed order directing the learned Executing Court to get the decree executed with the police assistance and submit his comments under what circumstances the decree was not executed for such a long period. 7. After passing of that order, learned counsel for the contemner Mr. Akshay Parekh moved an application and brought to my notice that one Karan Raj Giriya has preferred a writ petition No. 4220/94 and had obtained an interim order for maintaining the status quo. 8. When Mr. 7. After passing of that order, learned counsel for the contemner Mr. Akshay Parekh moved an application and brought to my notice that one Karan Raj Giriya has preferred a writ petition No. 4220/94 and had obtained an interim order for maintaining the status quo. 8. When Mr. Akshay, Parekh, learned counsel for the contemner brought the aforesaid stay order to the notice of this Court the execution of the decree by Police assistance in pursuance of my order dated 22.1.1997 was kept in abeyance uptil 16.2.1997. The learned Executing Court was directed to send its comments on or before 5.2.1997. The aforesaid order was modified on 5.2.1997. The learned Executing Court was directed to send its comments on or before 10.2.1997. Office was also directed to requisition the record of Civil Suit No. 182 (27/95) pending in the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 6, Jodhpur. Now, records of the aforesaid Civil Suit No. 182/94 (27/95) as well as record of writ petition No. 4220/94 are produced before this Court. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 10. Perused the relevant averments made in Contempt Petition No. 299/94, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4220/94, Civil Suit No. 182/94 (27/95) as well as the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 18.8.1993 whereby the judgment-debtor was allowed to remain in possession over the suit-shop for one year and he was also directed to hand-over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit-shop to the decree-holder on or before 18.8.1994. 11. Looking into the facts and circumstances of the present case, it would not be possible for this Court to pass effective order in S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 299/94 unless S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4220/94 is finally disposed of. The aforesaid writ petition is not cognizable by this Court as per daily cause list prepared under the authority of Hon'ble the Chief justice, therefore, it is not possible to pass any order on the present controversy. 12. Office is hereby directed to list the present Contempt Petition along with Civil Writ Petition No. 4220/94 before Hon'ble The Chief Justice for passing appropriate order or orders in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 13. 12. Office is hereby directed to list the present Contempt Petition along with Civil Writ Petition No. 4220/94 before Hon'ble The Chief Justice for passing appropriate order or orders in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 13. Record of Civil Suit No. 182/94 (27/95) requisitioned from the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 6, Jodhpur be detained till final disposal of the present proceedings. 14. In the interest of justice, meanwhile execution of the decree with police assistance shall be kept in abeyance uptil 3.3.1997.In view of the aforesaid discussion, bailable warrant issued against the judgment debtor on 22.1.1997 is hereby recalled.Orders Accordingly. *******