Civil Revision No. 4432 of 2008 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 4432 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: 04.02.2010 State of Punjab ....Petitioner Versus Baljit Singh and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present: - Mr. N.S. Virk, Addl. A.G., Punjab. Mr. Naresh Kaushal, Advocate, for the respondents. ***** VINOD K. SHARMA, J (ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 10.3.2008, passed by the learned Executing Court, Rupnagar, the operative part of which reads as under: - “It is agreed that the number of the Writ of the present petition before the Hon'ble High Court was RFA 842. A Photo Copy of the order dated 7.10.2005 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has been placed on the file. The above said number does not lie figured in the said order. In fact it is conceded that the execution proceedings in the present case have not been stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Hence, I hold that simply because the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, has stayed the execution proceedings in the connected case, it cannot be assumed that the present execution proceedings have also been stayed. The objection petition is therefore, dismissed. Now warrant of attachment be issued for 20.5.2008, on filing of list of property, charges and statement of Civil Revision No. 4432 of 2008 (O&M) -2- account.” The contention of the learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, to challenge the impugned award was, that the appeal filed by the decree-holder was disposed of in terms of the order passed in connected appeal. The operation of the judgment and decree has been stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, therefore, the decision in the appeal filed by the decree-holder would also be subject to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the connected cases. It is further contended by the learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, that in order to avoid any technical difficulty, Special Leave Petition against the order passed by this Court, in the case of decree-holder, has also been filed in the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It was also pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, that the amount, as per decree, has been deposited with the learned Executing Court and an order has also been passed by the learned Executing Court, for furnishing security for its refund in event of success before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, before the payment could be released to the respondent-decree-holder. In view of the facts stated above, this revision petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Executing Court to release the payment deposited by the petitioner for satisfaction of the decree, to the decree-holder only after accepting the security for its refund in event of success of appeal filed in the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The security be accepted after notice to the State. (Vinod K. Sharma) February 04, 2010 Judge R.S.