CR No.6476 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.6476 of 2008 Date of decision: 16.1.2009 Baldev Kaur ......Petitioner Versus Chhota Singh and others ......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Tribhawan Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. * * * Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. A decree was passed in favour of Gurcharan Singh son of Modan Singh (predecessor-in-interest of respondents No.1 to 4) for recovery of a sum of Rs.47,250/- and against Hakam Singh-respondent No.5. The petitioner who is wife of Hakam Singh, judgment-debtor filed an application before the Executing Court to the effect that her suit for maintenance was decreed on 16.2.2001 against Hakam Singh, judgment- debtor and as per that decree the aforesaid judgment-debtor is liable to pay more than a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to her and therefore she may be given maintenance amount from the sale proceeds of the land attached in execution of the decree passed in favour of Gurcharan Singh son of Modan Singh. The said application was dismissed by the Executing Court vide impugned order dated 6.9.2008 holding that property upon which charge was created by the Civil Court against Hakam Singh-JD in the decree in favour of the applicant in the maintenance suit i.e Civil Suit No.235 of 21.10.2000 is different than the property of the JD which had been sold in the present execution. Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid order, the present revision petition has been filed by Baldev Kaur. CR No.6476 of 2008 2 Vide order dated 25.11.2008, on request of the counsel for the petitioner, the case was adjourned to enable him to find out as to what has happened to the proceeds of the sale of the property which took place in the year 2006 in execution of the present decree. Today, during the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner has very fairly stated that no amount remains as balance from the proceeds of sale of the property in the impugned execution. In view of this fact alone, the present petition does not survive as no relief can be granted to the petitioner in this case. Dismissed. January 16, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE