Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:062300
2023:PHHC:062300 Page 1 of 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
120 CR-2566-2023 (O&M)
Date of decision: 27.04.2023
Raj Singh & Another
...Pe11oner(s)
Vs.
Mohinder Kaur
...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present:- Mr. Gaganvir Singh Gill, Advocate
for the pe oners.
***
NIDHI GUPTA, J.
Present Revision Pe on has been filed by the pe oners/judgment debtors seeking se&ng aside of order dated 03.04.2023 (Annexure P6) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Pa ala in Execu on Pe on No.EXE/102/2020 tled as "Mohinder Kaur Vs. Raj Singh & Another" whereby objec ons filed by pe oners/judgment debtors (Annexure P3) were dismissed, and warrants of possession of house of the pe oners has been issued.
2. At the very outset, it is admi<ed by learned counsel for the pe oners that Suit filed by respondent/plain ff/decree holder in the present case bearing No.140 of 06.08.2014 tled as "Mohinder Kaur Vs. Raj Singh & Another" has been decreed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Pa ala vide judgment and decree under execu on viz dated 18.12.2019 (Annexure P1). It is also admi<ed that vide the said judgment and decree under execu on, even consolidated Suit No.42 of 10.02.2016 filed by the pe oners tled as "Raj Singh Vs. Mohinder Kaur 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 02-05-2023 21:54:52 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:062300 2023:PHHC:062300 Page 2 of 3 & Others" has been simultaneously dismissed. It is admi<ed that appeal filed by the pe oners against said judgment and decree has been dismissed-in-default by learned Addi onal District Judge, Pa ala vide order dated 17.11.2022 (Annexure P2).
3. The only submission made on behalf of the pe oners is that the decree under execu on cannot be executed as sale deed dated 13.01.2011 and 24.08.2012 are sham documents having no binding force in the eyes of law. It is submi<ed that pe oner No.1/judgment debtor No.1 never executed any sale deed in favour of the decree holder at any point of me but has executed a mortgage deed of 8 biswas of share of their house along with his brother on 13.01.2011 in favour of one Sukhwinder Singh at the me of receiving loan amount of Rs.4,50,000/-. It is further submi<ed that the pe oners are in the process of filing for restora on of their Appeal.
4. Heard learned counsel. In my view, all the points and issues now sought to be raised by learned counsel for the pe oners, already stand adjudicated upon by the learned trial Court. These can be agitated by the pe oners in an appeal, and not before this Court in proceedings emana ng from execu on of the judgment and decree at hand. Learned counsel for the pe oners is a<emp ng to agitate points and raise objec ons which already stand adjudicated in the main Civil Suit which has already been decreed in favour of the respondent. Needless to say, learned Execu ng Court cannot go beyond the decree 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 02-05-2023 21:54:53 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:062300 2023:PHHC:062300 Page 3 of 3 or behind it. Accordingly, I find no ground is made out to interfere in the impugned order.
5. Present Revision Pe on accordingly stands dismissed.
6. Pending applica on(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of.
27.04.2023 (Nidhi Gupta)
Sunena Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:062300
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 02-05-2023 21:54:53 :::