Civil Revision No.910 of 2009 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.910 of 2009 Date of decision: 19.2.2009 Karam Chand ...Petitioner Versus Meedan and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr.Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner S.D.ANAND, J. It is apparent from the record that the respondents-decree holders are taking steps to execute the impugned decree in their capacity as legal representatives of the deceased-plaintiff in whose favour that decree came to be granted by the learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar on 9.1.2006 (RCA No.75/2003-Annexure P-1). The suit filed by Bandu had initially been dismissed by the learned Trial Court. However, the first appeal was allowed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar. In execution, the petitioner-judgment debtor raised an objection that the respondents-decree holders cannot be allowed to obtain possession of the property in suit through execution in view of the fact that an independent suit filed by the respondents-decree holders had been dismissed as withdrawn. Though, it is apparent from the record that a civil suit filed by the respondents-decree holders in their own right had been dismissed as Civil Revision No.910 of 2009 -2- **** withdrawn, it cannot be ignored from consideration that they are presently executing the decree (granted on 9.1.2006) in their capacity as legal representatives of their father. The mere fact that a civil suit filed by them in their own right had been dismissed as withdrawn would not affect their right to execute a decree which had been granted in favour of their father and they are presently on record as legal representatives of their father. The petition is held to be bereft of merit and is ordered to be dismissed in limine. February 19, 2009 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge