JUDGMENT : (DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.) Heard Mr. G. N. Sahewallah, the learned Senior counsel assisted by Ms. S. Todi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. K. Sen, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2 who is also on caveat. 2. The manner in which the learned Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.1, Sribhumi, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Executing Court’) have proceeded with the execution and dismissed the execution proceedings, this Court takes up the instant proceedings for disposal at the motion stage itself. 3. Taking into account that the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have jointly filed an application under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘the Code’) and the said application was filed on the basis of an affidavit filed by the respondent No.2, this Court finds no necessity of issuance of notice as the same would only delay the execution proceedings. 4. The materials on record shows that the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court vide a judgment and order dated 17.05.2012 in RSA No.8/2001 confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karimganj in Title Appeal No.36/1998. However, in doing so, certain modifications were made as would be seen from paragraph No.17 of the judgment and order dated 17.05.2012 passed by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court. Paragraph No.17 of the said judgment is reproduced herein under: “ 17 . In view of the aforesaid discussion, both the Courts below have rightly decreed the suit of the plaintiff Nos. 2 to 4 declaring landholder’s right in respect of the part of the Schedule-1 land i.e. 1 powa 4 jasti 5 pan 5 gandas of land. The decree for recovery of khas possession in respect of the said land has also rightly been passed. Hence the judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below in that regard is affirmed. The judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below declaring the plaintiff No.1’s tenancy right over the Schedule-1 land apart from the decree passed for recovery of khas possession in respect of the land other than the land measuring 1 powa 4 jasti 5 pan and 5 gandas is set aside.” 5. The judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below declaring the plaintiff No.1’s tenancy right over the Schedule-1 land apart from the decree passed for recovery of khas possession in respect of the land other than the land measuring 1 powa 4 jasti 5 pan and 5 gandas is set aside.” 5. From a perusal of the above quoted portion of the judgment and order passed by the learned Coordinate Bench, it is seen that the learned Coordinate Bench had held that the learned Courts below had rightly decreed the suit of the plaintiff Nos. 2 to 4 declaring landholder’s right in respect of the part of the Schedule-1 land i.e. 1 powa 4 jasti 5 pon 5 gondas of land and further held that a decree for recovery of khas possession in respect of the said land had also rightly been passed. The learned Coordinate Bench further held that insofar as the judgment and decree passed by the learned Courts below declaring the plaintiff No.1’s tenancy right over the Schedule-1 land apart from the decree passed for recovery of khas possession in respect of the land other than the land measuring 1 powa 4 jasti 5 pon and 5 gondas was set aside. 6. Pursuant thereto, an execution proceedings was filed before the learned Executing Court which was registered and numbered as Title Execution Case No.2/2016 wherein execution was sought for recovery of khas possession of the land described in Schedule-2. Pursuant to the said execution application being filed, the judgment debtors Nos. 3 and 4 filed an application being Misc. Case No.164/2016 seeking setting aside of the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No.293/1993 both by the learned Trial Court as well as by the Hon’ble Appellate Courts on the grounds and circumstances set-forth therein and dismiss the Title Execution Case No.2/2016. This application so filed by the judgment debtors more particularly the judgment debtor Nos. 3 and 4 was dismissed vide an order dated 14.02.2020. Being aggrieved, all the judgment debtors joined together to file an application under Article 227 of the Constitution which was registered and numbered as CRP (IO) No.58/2020 challenging the order dated 14.02.2020 passed in Title Execution Case No.2/2016 as well as Misc. Case No.164/2016. 7. 3 and 4 was dismissed vide an order dated 14.02.2020. Being aggrieved, all the judgment debtors joined together to file an application under Article 227 of the Constitution which was registered and numbered as CRP (IO) No.58/2020 challenging the order dated 14.02.2020 passed in Title Execution Case No.2/2016 as well as Misc. Case No.164/2016. 7. This Court vide an order dated 20.07.2022 disposed of the said proceedings with categorical directions upon the learned Executing Court to go ahead with the execution proceedings in Title Execution Case No.2/2016 strictly in terms to the decree passed by this Court i.e. in respect of 1 powa 4 jasti 5 pons 5 gondas which is a part of the Schedule-1 land in terms with the order dated 14.02.2020 passed in Title Execution Case No.2/2016 and locating the boundary as directed in the order dated 14.02.2020. Paragraph Nos. 8 to 11 being relevant is reproduced herein under: “ 8 . The above quoted portion of the judgment of this Court categorically shows that the decree holders’ rights have been declared by this Court in respect to a part of a Schedule-1 land i.e. 1 powa 4 jasti 5 pons 5 gondas of land and a decree for recovery of khas possession was also passed in respect to the said land. 9 . A perusal of the plaint categorically shows that the Schedule-2 land is situated in the southern portion of the Schedule-1 land. There are no material on record to show that any of the Courts below including this Court have held that the Schedule-2 land is not a part of the Schedule-1 land. 10 . Be that as it may, the decree passed by this Court has been specific to 1 powa 4 jasti 5 pons 5 gondas of land which is a part of the Schedule-1 land. Accordingly, this Court therefore directs the Executing Court to go ahead with the execution proceedings in Title Ex. Case No. 2/2016 strictly in terms to the decree passed by this Court i.e. in respect of 1 powa 4 jasti 5 pons 5 gondas which is a part of the Schedule1 land in terms with the order dated 14/2/2020 passed in Title Ex. Case No.2/2016 and locating the boundary as directed in the order dated 14/2/2020. 11 . Case No. 2/2016 strictly in terms to the decree passed by this Court i.e. in respect of 1 powa 4 jasti 5 pons 5 gondas which is a part of the Schedule1 land in terms with the order dated 14/2/2020 passed in Title Ex. Case No.2/2016 and locating the boundary as directed in the order dated 14/2/2020. 11 . It is made clear that if any excess land beyond the land which has been decreed by this Court is handed over, the Petitioners herein shall be at liberty to file appropriate application after the possession is delivered to the decree holders.” 8. It is relevant to take note of that there was no challenge to the said order passed by this Court dated 20.07.2022 in CRP (IO) No.58/2020 and as such, the same had attained finality. 9. Be that as it may, the learned Executing Court in spite of specific directions being passed by this Court in the above quoted paragraphs of the order dated 20.07.2022 issued a writ for delivery of possession in respect to both the Schedule-1 and the Schedule-2 land. The issuance of the said writ for delivery of possession was completely contrary not only to the judgment and decree passed by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 17.05.2012 in RSA No.8/2001 but also to the directions passed by this Court in the order dated 20.07.2022. The judgment debtors thereupon filed an application under Section 47 of the Code before the learned Executing Court which was registered and numbered as Misc. Case No.295/2025. The judgment debtors more particularly the respondent No.2 sought for recall of the writ for delivery of possession dated 12.03.2023 as well as sought for dismissal of the execution proceedings being Title Execution Case No.2/2016. The decree holders filed objections to the said application and drew the attention of the learned Executing Court to the order passed by this Court dated 20.07.2022 in CRP (IO) No.58/2020. Most surprisingly, vide an order dated 29.04.2025, the learned Executing Court dismissed the execution proceedings and as such, the present petition has been filed. 10. I have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and have perused the materials on record. 11. Most surprisingly, vide an order dated 29.04.2025, the learned Executing Court dismissed the execution proceedings and as such, the present petition has been filed. 10. I have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and have perused the materials on record. 11. From the judgment and decree passed by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 17.05.2012 in RSA No.8/2001, it is apparent that there is an executable decree insofar as a plot of land admeasuring 1 powa 4 jasti, 5 pon 5 gondas which is a part of the Schedule-1 land. This aspect of the matter was further reiterated by this Court in the order dated 20.07.2022 in CRP (IO) No.58/2020. In spite of that, the learned Executing Court had erroneously issued a writ for delivery of possession of Schedule-1 and Schedule-2 land without properly ascertaining the directions passed by this Court in the judgment and decree dated 17.05.2012 in RSA No.8/2001 as well as the order dated 20.07.2022 passed in CRP (IO) No.58/2020. In the opinion of this Court, the impugned order dated 29.04.2025 insofar as recalling the writ for delivery of possession dated 12.03.2023 was in accordance with law taking into account that the writ which was issued was not in consonance with the judgment and decree passed by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court as well as the order passed by this Court dated 20.07.2022. But it shocks and surprises this Court as to why the learned Executing Court had dismissed the Title Execution Case No.2/2016. 12. Mr. B.K. Sen, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the judgment debtors submitted that the land which was decreed is already in possession of the decree holders and as such, the decree was no longer executable. In the opinion of this Court, if the submissions so made by Mr. B. K. Sen, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the judgment debtors is accepted to be true, then also it may be a case of satisfaction but not a dismissal of the execution proceedings. Further to that, the impugned order does not mention that the decree holders/petitioners herein are in possession of the decreetal land. Under such circumstances, this Court interferes with the impugned order dated 29.04.2025 passed in Misc. Case No.295/2025 insofar as dismissal of the execution application being Title Execution Case No.2/2016. 13. Further to that, the impugned order does not mention that the decree holders/petitioners herein are in possession of the decreetal land. Under such circumstances, this Court interferes with the impugned order dated 29.04.2025 passed in Misc. Case No.295/2025 insofar as dismissal of the execution application being Title Execution Case No.2/2016. 13. This Court further disposes of the instant proceedings with the following observations and directions: (i) Title Execution Case No.2/2016 is restored to the file of the learned Executing Court. (ii) The learned Executing Court shall ensure that the decree so passed in RSA No.8/2001 is executed as per the mandate of law. (iii) Taking into account the submission of Mr. B. K. Sen, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the judgment debtors, the learned Executing Court shall also ensure by appointing a Commission as to whether the land which have been decreed by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court in RSA No.8/2001 is in possession of the decree holders and if the decree holders are not in possession of the said land, the decree holders be put to possession by issuance of appropriate writ for delivery of possession. (iv) Taking into account that the parties are duly represented, this Court directs the parties herein to appear before the learned Executing Court on 13.06.2025 for further proceedings of Title Execution Case No.2/2016.