C.R. No.825 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.825 of 2008 Date of decision:- 15.4.2009. Balwant Singh ...Petitioner Versus Balbir Kaur and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present:- Mr. Ashok Giri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Arvind Bansal, Advocate for Mr. Amandeep Agnihotri, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 5. Ms. Monika Jalota, Advocate for respondents No.6 to 10 and 12. JASWANT SINGH J.(Oral) The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner- Judgment Debtor for setting aside the order dated 26.11.2007 (Annexure P- 3) passed by learned District Judge, Patiala, whereby the application of the petitioner for release of his land from attachment, was dismissed. It is apparent from the record that respondents No.1 to 5- plaintiffs had filed a suit against the petitioner-defendant and also respondents No.6 to 12 for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as damages for injuries caused to one Bhag Singh son of Ajmer Singh resulting into his death as well as causing injuries to one Gurnam Singh and Labh Singh and the said suit was decreed on 16.2.2006. It is also not in dispute that during the pendency of the suit itself land of the petitioner was attached. It is also not disputed that an application was moved by the C.R. No.825 of 2008 -2- petitioner before the learned Appellate Court (since by that time the suit had been decreed) for release of the attached land on the basis that he was willing to tender the claimed amount of compensation qua his share. The said application was dismissed by the learned District Judge vide his impugned order dated 26.11.2007, hence, the present revision petition was filed. This Hon'ble Court vide order dated 5.5.2008 passed the following order:- “21 bighas 3 biswas of landed property of the petitioner has been attached in decree for recovery of Rs.2 lacs along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The petitioner has filed the present application to seek permission to satisfy the decree by allowing him to either mortgage or sell the part of the property attached. Such a course is permissible under Order 21 Rule 83 CPC. The prayer of the petitioner is that he be permitted to sell one acre of land so that he can satisfy the decretal amount which is due against the petitioner and seven others. Counsel for the contesting respondents apparently have no objection to the said prayer of the petitioner. Permission sought is granted. The prayer is permitted to sell one acre of land out of the attached property. The petitioner further prays that he may be permitted to sell Khasra No.701, 4 bighas 13 biswas. The petitioner after selling the said khasra number would deposit the decretal C.R. No.825 of 2008 -3- amount as due on the date of deposit with the Executing Court. The revision is adjourned to 25.8.2008.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has, today, stated at the Bar that in pursuance of order dated 5.5.2008, petitioner Balwant Singh has deposited a sum of Rs.6,02,000/- on 09.6.2008, which was the due amount of compensation by that date. However, the same is without prejudice to his rights to recover the amount from his co-defendants qua their share. He further submits that the plaintiffs-respondents have not filed any further appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs-respondents No.2 to 5 and respondents-co-defendants do not dispute this position. It is also not disputed that brother and co-defendants of the petitioner Balwant Singh namely Harchand Singh @ Chand and Jaswant Singh have filed an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 16.2.2006 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Trial Court in a suit for recovery wherein vide order dated 1st September, 2001, the land of the petitioner- Balwant Singh was attached. Learned counsel for the petitioner-defendant, in view of the aforesaid undisputed development, prays for a direction to the learned Executing Court/Appellate Court (where the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 16.2.2006 is pending) to release the remaining attached land of the petitioner with further liberty to recover the amount of compensation due from the co-defendants but paid by the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid facts of the present case, the prayer on behalf of the petitioner is accepted. Learned Appellate Court/District Judge, C.R. No.825 of 2008 -4- Patiala is directed to release the remaining attached land of the petitioner at the earliest. Petitioner shall also be at liberty to recover the amount of compensation in accordance with law from his co-defendants qua their liabilities, if any, discharged by the petitioner. Revision petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid terms. April 15, 2009 (JASWANT SINGH) vj JUDGE