https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199081 A person in admitted possession of immovable property cannot be dispossessed in execution without due process of law when no decree or independent eviction order has been obtained against him. Because the occupant's claim to continue in possession was pending adjudication under Order 21 Rules 98 and 99 CPC, summary removal was held to be high-handed and unlawful. The order directing dispossession was set aside, possession was restored, and the pending execution-related applications, including the application under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, were directed to be decided in accordance with law. en-us Tue, 16 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Feb 2018 17:44:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199081 A person in admitted possession of immovable property cannot be dispossessed in execution without due process of law when no decree or independent eviction order has been obtained against him. Because the occupant's claim to continue in possession was pending adjudication under Order 21 Rules 98 and 99 CPC, summary removal was held to be high-handed and unlawful. The order directing dispossession was set aside, possession was restored, and the pending execution-related applications, including the application under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, were directed to be decided in accordance with law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 16 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199081