Civil Revision No.4777 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.4777 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision:12.09.2011 Sukhbeer Singh ......Petitioner Versus Syndicate Bank Chainsa and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR. Present: Mr.Onkar Rai, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR , J.(oral) The compendium of the facts, relevant for disposal of the present revision petition and emitting from the record is that, the civil suit for recovery of Rs.33,933/- along with pendente lite and future interest filed by Syndicate Bank Chainsa-respondent No.1-plaintiff-DH(for brevity “the plaintiff-DH) against Sukhbeer Singh son of Chandan Singh-petitioner-defendant No.1-JD and Om Parkash son of Dharam Singh-respondent No.2-defendant No.2-JD(for short “the defendant-JDs”), was decreed by the trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 28.02.2005. It is not a matter of dispute that the main decree has already attained the finality. Since, the defendant-JDs did not pay the decretal amount, so, the plaintiff-DH filed the execution-petition(Annexure P-1), to execute the decree against the defendant-JDs. As, neither anybody appeared on behalf of defendant- JD No.1, nor filed any objection to the execution-petition, therefore, the Executing Court issued warrant of attachment of property of defendant No.1-JD, by means of impugned order dated 26.02.2009(Annexure P-2), which is as under:- “Objection not filed despite last opportunity. Case called for several times since morning but none has appeared on behalf of JD No.1. It is already 3.00 P.M. waited sufficiently. Hence JD No.1 is hereby preceded against Civil Revision No.4777 of 2011 2 ex-parte. Now warrant of attachment be issued on filing of list of property, MF etc. for 4.6.09.” 2. Sequelly, the application filed by defendant-JD No.1 for setting aside the ex-parte order(Annexure P-2) was dismissed as well by the Executing Court, by virtue of impugned order dated 02.05.2011(Annexure P-5), which in substance is as under:- “Perusal of the(sic.) file reveals that memo of appearance on behalf of JD was filed on 10.5.2008 thereafter 4 opportunities were given to the JD for filing of objection including last opportunity. On 26.2.2009 despite last opportunity JD failed to file any objections. Besides this he did not appear before the court on that day. From the act and conduct of JD, it seems that he has intentionally avoided the court and he had nothing to say in the matter. Moreover, no justified reasons have been given for non- appearance of JD on the date fixed. As JD has filed this application on 29.7.2010, it is also beyond period of limitation. Hence, application being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed.” 3. Aggrieved by the impugned decision(Annexures P-2 and P-5), petitioner-defendant JD No.1 preferred the present revision petition, invoking the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, going through the record with his valuable help and after deep consideration of the entire matter, to my mind, there is no merit in the instant revision petition in this respect. 5. As is evident from the record that defendant-JD No.1 did not comply with the decree and sufficient opportunities were granted to him, for filing the objection-petition, if any, including the last opportunity by the Executing Court, but he did not file any objections in this relevant connection, nor paid the decretal amount. 6. Meaning thereby, the Executing Court has recorded the cogent grounds in the impugned orders in this context. Such orders, containing the valid reasons, cannot legally be set aside, in exercise of limited revisional jurisdiction of this Court, as contemplated under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, unless Civil Revision No.4777 of 2011 3 the same are perverse and without jurisdiction. As, no such patent illegality or legal infirmity has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, the impugned orders are hereby maintained in the obtaining circumstances of the case. 7. In the light of aforesaid reasons, as there is no merit, therefore, the instant revision petition is hereby dismissed as such. September 12, 2011 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) seema JUDGE Civil Revision No.4777 of 2011 4 C.M.No.18991-CII of 2011 and C.M.Nos.22084-85-CII of 2011 in Civil Revision No.4777 of 2011 Present: Mr.Onkar Rai, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** C.M.No.18991-CII of 2011 Application is allowed as prayed for. C.M.No.22084-CII of 2011 Application is allowed as prayed for. C.M.No.22085-CII of 2011 This is an application under Section 151 CPC for preponement of the instant revision petition. Heard. For the reasons mentioned in the application, which is supported by an affidavit, hearing of the main petition is pre-poned. Let arguments in the main revision petition be heard today, as prayed for. September 12, 2011 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) seema JUDGE