IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.5108 of 2005 (O&M) Date of decision: 19.7.2010 State of Haryana and others ......Petitioner(s) Versus Vinod Kumar ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Ashok Jindal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for the appellants. Mr. Jaswant Jain, Advocate for the respondent. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral) This revision petition has been filed by the judgment-debtor/ State of Haryana challenging the orders dated 29.8.2005 and 2.9.2005. However, in the application for vacation of interim order dated 10.10.2006, an order dated 20.9.2005 has been reproduced wherein Sh. Tej Ram, Naib Tehsildar (Sales) had made a statement that in compliance of the decree, mutation No.6608 was sanctioned on 19.9.2005 and that the Government was not interfering in the possession of the plaintiff nor the Government would interfere and in view of the aforesaid statement, the Execution petition was ordered to be dismissed as having become infructuous by the learned Executing Court. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners could not dispute the aforesaid order dated 20.9.2005. In view of the aforesaid order, the present revision petition does not survive. Dismissed. July 19, 2010 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE