IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 2303 of 2009 Date of decision : December 17, 2009 Gurnam Singh ....Petitioner versus Rajinder Singh ....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. Sanjay Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. RS Budhwar, Advocate, for the respondent L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Respondent Rajinder Singh instituted suit against Gurnam Singh petitioner. Vide judgment and decree dated 24.9.2005, the suit was decreed on the basis of compromise between the parties. As per compromise, petitioner herein was to construct wall at his own cost and the said wall was to be joint wall of the parties and placing lintel on the wall, the petitioner had to place it on half the width i.e. 4½ inch width of the wall leaving remaining half for lintel of the respondent. However, the petitioner in violation of the said judgment and decree, placed his lintel on entire width of the wall. Feeling aggrieved by said action of the petitioner, respondent herein filed execution petition under Order 21 Rule 32 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Learned executing Court i.e. learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kurukshetra vide impugned order Civil Revision No. 2303 of 2009 -2- dated 24.2.2009 allowed the execution petition filed by respondent herein and directed the petitioner herein to restore the wall in proper condition by demolishing lintel on half width of the wall within a period of two months. Feeling aggrieved, the instant revision petition has been filed by the judgment debtor. Learned counsel for the petitioner offered that the respondent may be given liberty to place his lintel on entire width of the aforesaid wall at any level above the level of lintel of the petitioner but if the respondent wants to place his lintel below the level of lintel of the petitioner, then the respondent can insert requisite beams on the entire width of the wall and place the lintel on half width of the wall. Learned counsel for the respondent accepts the aforesaid offer. In view of the aforesaid, the instant revision petition is disposed of in terms contained in the preceding paragraph by modifying the order of the executing court. ( L.N. Mittal ) December 17, 2009 Judge 'dalbir'