Adnan Azam v. Kishan Sethi & Ors.

1. Both the petitions raise identical issue and, therefore, these are being taken up together.

2. Petitioner, on the strength of Eviction Petitions being allowed in his favour, has moved two different Execution Petitions, which have been registered as Ex. No. 2954/2024 and Ex. No. 2955/2024.

3. During the pendency of the aforesaid Execution Petitions, objection petitions have been filed and the learned Executing Court has, merely, CM(M) 1002/2025 & CM(M) 1003/2025 2 directed the decree holder to file reply, if any, to the aforesaid objection petitions.

4. The grievance of the petitioner is, merely, to the effect that objections were completely devoid of any merit and, therefore, learned Trial Court should not have even entertained the aforesaid objection petitions.

5. The next date before the learned Trial Court is stated to be 11.07.2025.

6. Merely because the present petitions, invoking supervisory jurisdiction, have been moved by the decree-holder, it would not mean that this Court should rather decide all such objection petitions, which are yet pending ajudication.

7. The petitions are accordingly disposed of with request to learned Trial Court to give requisite priority to said objection petitions and to make best endeavour to dispose of such objection petitions, as expeditiously as possible, particularly keeping in mind the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court given in Periyammal v. V. Rajamani, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 507.

8. All the pending applications are also disposed of in the aforesaid terms.