IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R.No.4885 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision : 5.8.2010 Gurmukh Singh ....Petitioner Versus Amar Singh ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr.Vipul Dharmani, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 30.8.2005 vide which the second set of objections filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. The respondent/decree-holder has a decree in his favour of the year 1966 passed in Civil Suit No.225 of 1964. Appeal against the said judgment and decree was dismissed upto the High Court in R.S.A.No.979 of 2002 in which apparently it was clearly observed that in view of the sale deed Ex.P-1, the property was sold along with the trees thereon and consequently the decree-holder was entitled to cut the trees and not the present petitioner. During the course of execution of the said decree, the petitioner filed objections and tried to stall the execution but the same were dismissed. On an earlier occasion objections were preferred in Execution No.108 of C.R.No.4885 of 2010 (O&M) -2- 10.8.1991 and the following issue was framed :- “Whether the land described in the decree and again in execution application is the same? If so, its effect?” The aforesaid issue was answered in favour of the decree- holder vide order dated 13.2.1996. In the present set of objections also similar pleas have been raised and the Executing Court has dismissed the same vide the impugned order. The instant revision petition has been filed with a grievance that the objections have been wrongly dismissed. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have considered the matter in its entirety. It is obvious that the petitioner is obstructive to the cause of justice. The decree-holder, who is having a decree in his favour since 1966, and which decree has been affirmed upto this Court, is being harassed. Earlier objections filed by the petitioner were dismissed in the year 1996. Despite that the possession of the suit property has not been given to the respondent because of the tenacity of the petitioner to defeat the process of law. The impugned order was passed in the year 2005 and this revision petition has been preferred after five years which further reveals the desperate mind set of the petitioner who is stalling the process of law. The court views the conduct of the petitioner with extreme seriousness which is not only obstructive, as observed earlier, but also defiant. He has also wasted the time of the courts unnecessarily without there being any recognizable or cogent right in his favour. This court has been informed that the warrants of possession have C.R.No.4885 of 2010 (O&M) -3- been issued. In this view of the matter, the revision petition is dismissed with the observations that the Executing Court shall instantly forthwith within a fortnight direct the possession of the property in question to be delivered to the respondent with the help of the police. The Executing Court shall also ensure that the possession is handed over to the respondent satisfactorily. The petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.1,00,000/- to be recovered by the Executing Court. 5.8.2010 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss