In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... C.W.P. No.12515 of 2007 ..... Date of decision:26.8.2009 Norang .....Petitioner v. Assistant Collector, First Grade, Mahendergarh and others .....Respondents .... Present: Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondents. ..... S.S. Saron, J. This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner-Norang seeking quashing of the order dated 6.6.2007 (Annexure-P.3) passed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Mahendergarh (respondent No.1). The petitioner had mortgaged his land with possession measuring 30 Kanals for an amount of Rs.60,000/- to Mahabir Singh and Rajbir Singh sons of Shiv Lal (respondents No.2 and 3) vide mortgage deed No.204 dated 30.5.2003. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application on 15.9.2006 before the learned Deputy Commissioner, Mahendergarh for redemption of the above mortgage. The petitioner deposited the sum of Rs.60,000/- in the Treasury vide challan No.400 dated 15.9.2006. The learned Collector, Sub Division, Mahendergarh vide order dated 11.10.2006 (Annexure-P.1) ordered redemption of the mortgage land and also ordered that the petitioner would be entitled to take possession of the land between C.W.P. No.12515 of 2007 [2] 1.5.2007 and 15.6.2007. Mahabir Singh and Rajbir Singh (respondents No.2 and 3) along with their brother Mukesh filed a suit against Norang (petitioner) for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 2.6.2003 and agreement of extension of limitation dated 30.5.2005 pertaining to agricultural land measuring 29 Kanals 17 Marlas situated in the revenue estate of Village Koka, Tehsil and District Mahendergarh for a sale consideration of Rs.2 Lacs per acre i.e. Rs.7,46,250/- after adjusting Rs.5,50,000/- paid as earnest money and suit for perpetual injunction restraining the petitioner-Norang from alienating the property in question to any person except the plaintiffs and also from creating any kind of charge thereon and from interfering in possession and user of the plaintiffs over the suit land. In the alternative suit for refund of the earnest money of Rs.5,50,000/- along with damages of Rs.1,96,250/- i.e. total Rs.7,46,250/- along with interest @ 18% per annum thereon from the date of suit till the final payment was made. The learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mahendergarh vide order dated 9.1.2007 (Annexure-P.2) on the application for interim injunction ordered that till further orders the petitioner-Norang shall not alienate the suit property to any other person except the plaintiffs. Besides, the parties were directed to maintain status quo regarding possession of the suit property till further orders. However, it was made clear that the said order would not bind the proceedings of redemption initiated by the petitioner before the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Mahendergarh and other proceedings with regard to redemption of the suit land. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the order that the order of status quo passed on 9.1.2007 would not bind the proceedings C.W.P. No.12515 of 2007 [3] of redemption initiated by the petitioner, the learned Assistant Collector Ist Grade (SDM), Mahendergarh has passed an order for seeking clarification from the Court and till then the execution proceedings have been adjourned sine die. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that in terms of the order dated 9.1.2007 the Civil Court while ordering the parties to maintain status quo had made it clear that the stay order would not bind the proceedings of redemption initiated by defendant (petitioner-Norang) before the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Mahendergarh and other proceedings with regard to redemption of the suit land. Therefore, it is clear that the order of status quo regarding possession is in no manner to affect the redemption proceedings that have been initiated by the petitioner. Accordingly, the learned Assistant Collector Ist Grade (SDM), Mahendergarh clearly erred in adjourning the execution petition sine die and asking the parties to get clarification. The executing proceedings in fact are liable to be undertaken as the order dated 9.1.2007 does not affect the same. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 6.6.2007 (Annexure-P.3) passed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade (SDM), Mahendergarh is set aside and quashed. The learned Assistant Collector, Ist Grade, Mahendergarh shall proceed with the execution proceedings notwithstanding the order dated 9.1.2007 (Annexure-P.2) passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mahendergarh. August 26, 2009. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp* C.W.P. No.12515 of 2007 [4] NOTE: Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not:Yes/No