IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.2379 of 2009 Date of decision:30.04.2009 Avtar Kaur alias Taro ...Petitioner versus Ajaib Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. K.K.Garg, Advocate for the petitioner. ----- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? Yes. 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? Yes. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? Yes. K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The revision is filed against the order dismissing an application filed by third party to a suit who wanted the execution of the decree to be stayed on the ground that in relation to the same property that there had been a suit instituted by the petitioners to treat themselves as legal heirs of the deceased-Gurbax Singh and that till the disposal of the Civil Suit, the execution petition shall be stayed. The petition was dismissed by the Executing Court. The petitioners had another ground to urge before the Executing Court that the warrant of delivery shall be issued in the name of all the legal heirs of Gurbax Singh at whose instance the suit had been originally filed. 2. The prayer asked for in the petition is indeed strange. The suit had been filed by Gurbax Singh for recovery of possession that Civil Revision No.2379 of 2009 - 2 - during the pendency of the suit, Gurbax Singh died. One Gopal Singh claimed as a beneficiary under a Will alleged to have been executed by Gurbax Singh and he was impleaded as a legal representative. The sister of Gopal Singh, Avtar Kaur and others challenged the impleadment of Gopal Singh on the basis of Will and the matter came up to the High Court where the High Court had directed that Gopal Singh would continue to the proceedings and the persons who claim themselves to be legal heirs would have independent remedy to work out the rights in the property. Subsequent to the directions from the High Court, the legal heirs of Gurbax Singh have filed a suit before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Barnala and the said suit is believed to be pending. If the petitioners establish themselves to be the legal heirs of Gurbax Singh and the Will propounded by Gopal Singh is held to be not true, it could ultimately happen that the petitioners become entitled to the property as co-owners with Gopal Singh and the suit would ultimately secure to them the relief of possession of such shares as they are entitled to. Right now there is no way by which a person who was permitted to be impleaded as party and has obtained a decree as a legal representative of the estate of Gurbax Singh could be stalled from executing the decree. The decree is executed by Gopal and if he takes possession, he will do so as merely a legal representative and his rights will have to ultimately conform to whatever rights that the petitioners obtain in the Civil Suit filed by them against Gopal Singh. The Executing Court cannot go behind the decree which was already passed and confirmed by the High Civil Revision No.2379 of 2009 - 3 - Court. The execution that is levied against the judgment debtor has to go through its full course, unhampered by claims of persons as other legal heirs of the deceased Gurbax Singh. The Executing Court has correctly pointed out that the judgment debtor is already enjoying the property in spite of adverse decree against him and to stall the proceedings further and prevent the person who was permitted to be impleaded as legal representative would cause needless hardship which is not on the benefit of the estate of Gurbax Singh. The order passed by the Court below dismissing the application is perfectly justified and there is no scope for interference in the revision. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 30.04.2009 sanjeev