C.R.No.570 of 2008. -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.570 of 2008. Decided on July 07, 2009. Mehar Singh ..Petitioner VERSUS Smt.Hardip Kaur & Others. ..Respondents * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI PRESENT Mr.P.C.Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner. Respondent Nos.3 to 5 and 10 to 13 ex parte. M.M.S. BEDI, J, (ORAL) Counsel for the petitioner submits that this revision petition may be treated as an appeal. Without expression of any opinion C.R.No.570 of 2008. -2- whether the revision deserves to be converted into appeal, it is sufficient to observe that the adjudication of this revision petition will be an exercise in futility as the petitioner had sought the relief of initiation of contempt proceedings against respondent Nos.2 to 7 for having violated an interim order passed by lower appellate Court dated 19.07.2005, directing the parties to maintain status quo. It is mentioned that despite the specific order the respondents had raised construction on a portion of the property in dispute. The Additional District Judge, Jagadhri, while dismissing the application of the petitioner vide order dated 12.05.2007, has held that the appellants and the respondents cannot be held responsible for that construction which has been raised in a portion of the property in dispute and as such, no case is made out for any action against them for alleged violation of interim order dated 19.07.2005. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the appeal has finally been decided and a Regular Second appeal No.1898 of 2007 filed against the order passed in the main appeal has C.R.No.570 of 2008. -3- also been decided by this Court on 09.07.2007. The petitioner claims himself to be decree holder having a decree for possession in his favour. It is claimed that most of the land in dispute is in possession of the petitioner-decree holder except for a small portion on which construction has been raised by the other party. Counsel for the petitioner informs that Raghbir Singh has been a party before the Civil Court, Appellate Court and the High Court and the judgment and decree is binding upon him. In view of the above circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the unexecuted part of the decree can be got executed by the petitioner-decree holder in accordance with law. As such, this revision petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the legal remedy available to him to enforce his rights accrued to him under the decree of the Civil Court. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE July 07, 2009. rkarora