https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187823 A revision under section 115 CPC is not maintainable against an interlocutory order in execution proceedings because it does not finally determine the lis. The Court also reiterated that fraud can unsettle judicial proceedings only when it is specifically pleaded and proved; a bare allegation cannot justify interference with execution of a concluded eviction decree. Objections that merely seek to reopen issues already decided, including ownership, landlord-tenant relationship, and the applicability of rent law, cannot obstruct execution. The High Court's interference was set aside, the decree-holder's right to execute the decree was restored, and execution was directed to be completed expeditiously with exemplary costs. en-us Wed, 09 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Nov 2016 12:28:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187823 A revision under section 115 CPC is not maintainable against an interlocutory order in execution proceedings because it does not finally determine the lis. The Court also reiterated that fraud can unsettle judicial proceedings only when it is specifically pleaded and proved; a bare allegation cannot justify interference with execution of a concluded eviction decree. Objections that merely seek to reopen issues already decided, including ownership, landlord-tenant relationship, and the applicability of rent law, cannot obstruct execution. The High Court's interference was set aside, the decree-holder's right to execute the decree was restored, and execution was directed to be completed expeditiously with exemplary costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 09 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187823