JUDGMENT 1. - I have heard the learned counsel for admission of this revision petition. 2. Decree holder respondent obtained a decree for eviction of the suit property against the petitioners. An appeal was filed which was dismissed on 28.1.1999 for non-prosecution. Thereafter execution proceeded and the executing Court issued warrant for possession. When the same was being executed the petitioner judgment debtor looked the door of. the suit property and tried to create law and order problem about which the Nazir of the Court reported to the executing Court. Thereupon it was ordered that the police aid be taken and the warrant be got executed. The judgment debtors raised objection to it which have been dismissed and hence this revision petition has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the executing Court should not have executed the decree without issuing a notice. It has been replied by the learned executing Court that the decree of the trial Court merged into the decree of the appellate Court and hence notice u/0. 21, R. 22 CPC was not necessary to be issued. Learned counsel for the petitioners has not seriously challenged this aspect of the matter. His only contention is that the police aid should not have been granted without proper inquiry. 4. It is evident from the order of the learned executing Court that when the Nazir of the Court went to deliver possession, the judgment debtors instead of handing over possession put lock on the door of the property and invited so many persons at the spot in order to create law and order problem. The decree holder submitted an application and the Nazir has also reported the fact to the executing Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Court did not adjudicate upon this application and ordered for the police assistance to the Nazir. I am of the view what there is no jurisdictional error committed by the executing Court. It was the judgment debtor himself who put the lock, invited people of the locality, created law and order situation and obstructed in execution of the decree. The Nazir reported to the Court about it and, therefore, the executing Court passed the impugned order. There is no illegality in the order. 5. Consequently, the revision petition is hereby dismissed at the admission stage.Revision dismissed. *******