Raj Singh And Another vs Mohinder Kaur
2023 Latest Caselaw 5549 P&H

                                                    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

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:062300

& 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

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:062300

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