BABU LAL vs RAJ KUMAR

The Supreme Court addressed the application of Section 22(1) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, which allows a plaintiff seeking specific performance of a contract for immovable property to also request possession. The Court held that while the plaintiff had claimed possession in the suit, the decree did not grant such relief, rendering the execution of the decree valid against the appellant, who was not a party to the original decree. The Court emphasized that the executing court's decision to overrule the appellant's objection was correct as he had not been dispossessed yet.