Civil Revision No.796 of 2011(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Revision No.796 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: February 3, 2011 Smt.Veena Rani and others .....Petitioners v. Harjit Singh and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.G.C.Shahpuri, Advocate for the petitioners. ..... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) C.M.No.3207-CII of 2011 1. Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Civil Revision No.796 of 2011 2. The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the impugned order dated 21.1.2011, Annexure P7, vide which application for interim stay has been dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned Additional District Judge, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri. 4. Brief facts relevant for the decision of present revision petition are that petitioners as LRs of Yash Pal filed objection in the execution petition filed by respondent-decree-holder by taking the plea that as per family settlement entered between Yash Pal, his brother and his mother, i.e., judgment debtor, some portion of property in dispute was delivered to Yash Pal and hence, they cannot be ejected from the said portion, which was possessed by Yash Pal. The said objection petition was dismissed by learned Executing Court, vide order dated 4.1.2011. Against the said order, present petitioners filed appeal before learned District Judge, notice of Civil Revision No.796 of 2011(O&M) -2- which was ordered to be issued for 25.2.2011 and however, learned appellate Court refused to grant interim relief qua dispossession of the present petitioner-objectors. 5. The only point argued by learned counsel for the petitioners is that pending appeal before learned Additional District Judge, which is first appeal, shall be argued by petitioners on 25.2.2011 itself. It has been also stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that it will be their responsibility to get the respondents served through their counsel in the Executing Court by taking summons dasti. Hence, only prayer made is that dispossession of petitioner be stayed till the next date of hearing, i.e., 25.2.2011. 6. Hence, in view of these facts, the present revision petition is disposed of with direction to learned appellate court that efforts be made to hear the arguments in this appeal on 25.2.2011 and efforts be also made to decide the same at the earliest and preferably within a week from 25.2.2011. 7. However, till then dispossession of the petitioners from the premises in dispute is stayed. 3.2.2011 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge