IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 2875 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 19.5.2009 Ombir Singh and others ....Petitioners Versus Om Parkash Singh and another ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr.Pritam Saini, Advocate for the petitioners. RAJESH BINDAL J The challenge in the present petition is to the order dated December 23, 2008 passed by the learned Court below whereby in execution of judgment and decree dated 10.2.1999 passed in favour of respondent No.1 possession of the disputed portion of land has been handed over to him with police help. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the disputed portion is infact part of Khasra No. 245 which is owned and possessed by the petitioners/defendants. Now it has been found in the report of Kanungo that the same is part of Khasra No. 245 known as Begosha. Once that is so the respondent No1/plaintiff cannot be handed over the possession thereof. However, I do not find any merit in the submission made. The suit was decreed 10 years back. The judgment and decree of the trial Court was upheld upto this Court and before filing of the present petition the petitioners had already approached this Court twice in execution proceedings only. Now at the fag end after even the possession had already been delivered to the respondent No.1/plaintiff with police help after passing of the impugned order on December 23, 2008, the present petition has been filed raising a new plea which was not raised in any of the proceedings either during the pendency of civil suit or even in the earlier petitions when the petitioners approached this Court objecting to the execution of decree. Even now it is only in the report of Kanungo that the disputed property is shown to be part of Khasra No. 245 owned by the petitioners whereas ever since the litigation started way back in the year 1994 such plea was never raised. For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find any merit in the submission made, the revision petition is accordingly dismissed. (RAJESH BINDAL) 19.5.2009 JUDGE Reema