CMPMO 29 of 2007. 29.4.2008 Present: Mr. R.K.Gautam, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Naveen Bhardwaj, counsel for the petitioners. Respondent Sant Ram in person. This petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order of the learned executing Court dated 8.8.2006 whereby warrant of attachment has been issued against the property of the petitioner- judgment debtor. The main ground taken up by the judgment debtor – petitioner is that the matter had been finally settled on 21.1.2006 when it was agreed that the judgment debtor would pay to the decree holder a sum of Rs.12,000/- in full and final satisfaction of the decree. By its order dated 2.11.2006, learned Additional District Judge negatived the contention that the decree stood finally satisfied on the payment of Rs.12000/- as urged by the judgment debtor. The learned Court considered two orders passed by the learned District Judge to the effect that the judgment debtor had agreed to make payment of Rs.12000/- submitting that it should be in final satisfaction of the entire decretal amount. On consideration of the entire material before it, the claim of the judgment debtor was negatived holding that there had been no settlement as -2- alleged. The same point is being urged before this Court. I do not find any error of jurisdiction or perversity of finding of fact or a ground made out for judicial review in the matter. The judgment debtor has already availed of his right to appeal and the learned appellate Court has rightly dismissed the objections filed by the judgment debtor holding that the decree was not satisfied. In the circumstances, there is no error of jurisdiction calling for intervention of this Court. As a revisional Court, it would not be open to me to undertake reassessment of the evidence on record. This petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. April 29, 2008(PC). (Dev Darshan Sud), J.