IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 3552 of 2011 Date of decision: 27.5.2011 Tajinder Singh … Petitioner versus Kuldip Singh and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present: Mr. R. K.Rana, Advocate, for the petitioner ... ARVIND KUMAR, J: The present petitioner is one of the judgment-debtors. Decree-holder Kuldip Singh filed an execution petition in pursuance of judgment and decree dated 20.1.2003 wherein a decree for declaration and joint possession to the extent of half share including the share already in the name of the plaintiff , was passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants. In the execution petition, the present petitioner filed his objections. The executing Court vide impugned order dated 25.4.2011 has ordered for issuance of warrant of possession for getting the share of the plaintiff delivered to him as per decree dated 20.1.2003. Hence, this revision. The only argument that has been addressed by the counsel for the petitioner-judgment-debtor is that the impugned order is non-speaking. It has also been pointed out that it was argued that the warrant only for symbolic possession can be issued when a decree for joint possession is under execution and the actual possession can be taken by the decree-holders only by way of partition in accordance with loaw. However, nothing has been discussed in the impugned order with regard to the said argument. In view of this, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remitted back to the executing Court to pass a fresh speaking order after hearing both the parties, keeping in view the objections taken by the present judgment-debtor, in accordance with law purely on merits without being C.R. No. 3552 of 2011 -2- influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. May 27, 2011 ( ARVIND KUMAR ) JS JUDGE