EFA No. 1 of 2006 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH EFA No. 1 of 2006 Decided on : 25-08-2008 Surjit Singh ....Appellant VERSUS Gurbax Kaur and another ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present:- Mr. Naveen Batra, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Munish Gupta, Advocate respondent No.1. RAJESH BINDAL J It is informed by counsel for the appellant that respondent no.2 has since expired, his name be deleted from the array of parties. In the present case, under execution proceedings initiated by respondent no.1 against respondent no.2 on account of recovery of maintenance charges pendente lite in an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the amount sought to be recovered is Rs. 13,500/- for which the land belonging to respondent no.2, husband of respondent no.1 was attached. In the objections filed by the appellant, it was stated that the land in question, which was attached for the satisfaction of the amount claimed by respondent no.1, had infact been purchased by him from respondent no.2 in the year 1985 and it was only because mutation was not entered in the revenue record, it was shown in the name of respondent no.2. Be that as it may, keeping in view the amount involved in the present case, I do not want to interfere in the impugned order passed by the learned Court below. However, the same shall not prejudice the right of the appellant to raise the objection regarding the respondent no.2 not being the owner of the land in EFA No. 1 of 2006 2 question if at any subsequent stage any amount is sought to be recovered by respondent no. 1 against respondent no. 2 by attachment and sale of the land which is stated to have been purchased by the appellant. With these observations, the present appeal is disposed of. August 25, 2008 (Rajesh Bindal) rekha Judge