IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 603 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: 27.5.2009 Punjab Kaur and others .. Petitioners v. Bachint Singh .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Dhruv Dayal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. J. S. Brar, Advocate for the respondent. Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 30.11.2007, passed by the learned Executing Court, whereby in execution of a judgment and decree of the Civil Court, which was upheld by the learned lower appellate court, the learned Executing Court, as a matter of indulgence, had directed the petitioners-Judgment Debtors to furnish bank guarantee of Rs. 4,00,000/-, considering the fact that Regular Second Appeal against the judgment and decree of the first appellate court was pending before this Court, even though no stay was granted therein. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that as against the bank guarantee, the petitioners may be permitted to furnish security of land for satisfaction of the decree, in case the appeal is ultimately dismissed. However, I do not find any merit in the submission made. The learned Executing Court was quite indulgent in even granting stay of sale proceedings on furnishing of bank guarantee, as no stay was granted by this Court of the decree in the Regular Second Appeal. Another fact, which is relevant, is that the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre on 30.10.2008. Even conciliation proceedings failed, as it is noticed in the noting dated 21.4.2009 of the Mediator that in the last three mediation proceedings, the petitioners had not appeared. Accordingly, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. The revision petition is dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 27.5.2009 mk