Civil Revision No. 1424 of 2009 -1- *** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 1424 of 2009 Date of decision: 17.03.2009. Gurnam Singh ....Petitioner Versus Gian Kaur ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr.Padam Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner ***** S.D.ANAND, J. The petitioner-judgment debtor-objector filed the impugned plea under Section 151/152 C.P.C. for the correction of the amount which he was liable to pay under the impugned decree. If the plea was to be allowed, it would have reduced the amount payable by the petitioner- judgment debtor. The learned Executing Court declined the plea by observing that since the application (under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C.) for setting aside the impugned exparte judgment and decree had been dismissed and the objection petition had also been dismissed, the present plea for correction of the decree did not merit acceptance. On the own showing of the petitioner, an appeal preferred by him (against the rejection of the plea under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. by the learned Trial Court) is pending consideration before the learned District Court. If that appeal is dismissed ultimately, the petitioner-judgment debtor shall have to look for whatever other remedy in the higher forum is Civil Revision No. 1424 of 2009 -2- *** available to him. If that plea is allowed by the learned District Court, the petitioner-judgment debtor may consider the advisability of raising this very plea afresh because the plea has been presently declined by the learned Executing Court on a finding that the plea for setting aside of the impugned exparte judgment and decree stands dismissed and the objection also stand dismissed. That objection petition had been filed on an altogether different plea. The petition shall stand dismissed in the light of the observations aforementioned. March 17, 2009 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge