Civil Revision No.1188 of 2009 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.1188 of 2009 Date of decision: 1.04.2009. Haryana Urban Development Authority .....Petitioner Versus Ashok Pal ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. Dharamvir Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Harit Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Adish Gupta, Advocate for respondents Nos. 1,4(i) and 4(iv). Mr. Adarsh Jain, Advocate for respondents No. 2,3,4 (ii) and 4 (iii). ***** S.D.ANAND, J. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner challenges, at the very outset, the very maintainability of the impugned execution application (Annexure P-2) by averring that a second execution application is not competent in view of the fact that an earlier execution application had been dismissed by the learned Executing Court as fully satisfied vide order dated 21.4.2007 (Annexure P-1). Further, the grievance of the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that direction issued by the learned Executing Court to re-apportionment (in the light of ratio in Gurpreet Civil Revision No.1188 of 2009 -2- **** Singh Vs. Union of India 2006 (2) PLJ 593 of the amount payable is not in order. Insofar as the first count of grievance is concerned, it is misconceived in view of the fact that the Execution Application was never disposed of as fully satisfied. All that the learned Executing Court had ordered was that form 'C' be prepared and issued in favour of the decree holder and he file be consigned to record room after due compliance. The order cannot, by any stretch of interpretation, be indicated to mean that the execution application had been ordered to be dismissed as satisfied. Insofar as the latter count of grievance is concerned, it is premature. The Apex court (in Gurdeep Singh's case (supra)) was dealing with the re-appropriation in the context of the payment of interest on solatium. In the present case, it is common ground that the execution application had been filed to recover the enhanced compensation. Even otherwise, all that the learned Executing Court had ordered is that the balance amount shall be calculated as per the ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court in Gurdeep Singh's case (supra). As and when the Land Acquisition Collector file his calculation, the matter will be adjudicated upon by the learned Executing Court and the affected party shall have a right of appeal or revision, which ever is permissible under the law. Disposed of accordingly. April 01, 2009 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge