Civil Revision No. 2795 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 2795 of 2011 Date of Decision: 29.4.2011 *** Milakh Raj & Anr .. Petitioners Vs. Krishan Lal .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present:- Mr. A.K. Chopra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Harminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. Vide impugned order dated 15.2.2011 the application of the respondent-decree holder has been allowed and he has been permitted to deposit the balance sale consideration. Heard. It is evident from the record that the suit filed by respondent-plaintiff for specific performance of agreement to sell was decreed on 7.11.2005 and he was directed to deposit the balance sale consideration, which he did within the stipulated time. It is only to avoid the amount getting elapsed, the decree holder withdrew the amount that too under the orders of the Court. It is not in dispute that the said amount was only to be given to the petitioner on his execution of the sale deed and delivery of possession to the decree-holder, which he did not since his objections were pending, but now the same have been dismissed. Hence, it was rightly held that the judgment debtor who since have not executed the sale deed, is not having any lien over the amount deposited by the decree- holder and cannot deprive him from depositing the balance sale consideration. There is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. The instant petition being without merit is accordingly dismissed in limine. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE April 29 , 2011 Jiten