C.R. No. 2646 of 2009 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh … C.R. No. 2646 of 2009 Date of decision: May 11,2009 Naresh Kumar Mehta alias Naresh Mehra ..Petitioner Versus Vinay Mehra and another ..Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg Present: Mr. Sachin Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. ... Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral) The petitioner has filed this revision petition challenging the order dated 9.1.2009 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Amritsar (executing Court), whereby warrant of possession of the demised premises was issued against the petitioner on the basis of civil court decree dated 25.9.2007 passed in Civil Suit RBT No.96/2005. Admittedly, the Civil Court has passed a judgment and decree dated 25.9.2007 (Annexure P-2) against the petitioner whereby, he was directed to vacate and hand over possession of the demised property to the plaintiff- respondent within three months from the date of judgment. In spite of the fact that aforesaid judgment and decree had attained finality, the defendant failed to hand over possession of the demised premises to the plaintiff pursuant to the said decree. From the record of the petition, it appears that the plaintiff- respondents filed an execution application of the aforesaid decree. The petitioner filed objections (Vide Annexure P-4) to the aforesaid execution application. However, the executing court vide impugned order dated 9.1.2009 (Annexure P-1) proceeded ex. parte against the judgment debtor who failed to C.R. No. 2646 of 2009 2 appear and ordered issuance of warrants of possession of the demised premises. The aforesaid order has been challenged by the petitioner only on the ground that he was proceeded against ex parte. The petitioner has failed to convince his bonafides for his non-appearance before the executing court. I have also perused the objections (Annexure P-4) filed by the judgment debtor/petitioner before the executing court. Even the counsel for the petitioner failed to convince this court on the merits of any of the aforesaid objections as submitted by the petitioner before the executing court. In this view of the matter, I find no merit in the revision petition. Dismissed. May 11, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) nk JUDGE