C.R. No. 3931 of 2009 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 3931 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 22, 2009 Ujjagar Singh …..Petitioner Vs. Sukhjit Singh and others …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate with Mr. Deepak Sabharwal, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Counsel for the petitioner submits that the objector- petitioner had brought to the notice of Executing Court the order dated October 17, 2007 passed in Crl. Misc. No. 37137-M of 2007 directing the parties to maintain status quo regarding the suit property. Though a reference has been made to the said order in para 2 of the impugned order, but at the same time the Executing court has held that the petitioner cannot object to the delivery of possession of the suit land to C.R. No. 3931 of 2009 (O&M) [2] decree-holder, implying thereby that the Executing Court has given a direction for delivery of possession despite there being an order of High Court. After hearing counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the objection of the petitioner would fall either under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC or Order 21 Rule 99 CPC and it will be deemed to be an adjudication under Rule 98 or Rule 100 CPC which order is to be treated as a decree which is subject to an appeal as all the questions regarding right, title or interest in the property were required to be determined by the Executing Court under Order 21 Rule 101 CPC. The order apparently is appealable order. This petition is disposed of relegating the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal in accordance with law. It will be open to the petitioner to derive the benefit of order of High court, if beneficial in any manner, to the petitioner. The petitioner may avail the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act while filing appeal. September 22, 2009 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE