Civil Revision No.4838 of 2003 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.4838 of 2003 Date of decision:1st September, 2009 Smt. Satnam Kaur ......Petitioner Versus Mohan Singh and others ......Respondents Before: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA Present: Mr. C.B.Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate for the respondent. Rajive Bhalla, J. The petitioner challenges an order dated 25.09.2003, passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hoshiarpur, Dasuya, dismissing his objection to the execution of decree dated 29.01.1999 passed in civil suit no. 260 of 1992 titled as “Mohan Singh Vs. Surjit Singh and Joti Saroop”. I have heard counsel for the parties, perused the impugned order and the judgment and decree dated 29.01.1999, passed by Civil Judge, Junior Division, Dasuya. The decree under execution pertains to land measuring 4 marlas and 6 sarsahi and a part of land measuring 14 marlas bearing khewat no. 59 khatoni no. 81, khasra no. 30 R/2/2/2. Admittedly and as held by the executing court, the petitioner has purchased 5 marlas 3 ½ sarsahi by way of registered sale deed dated 12.01.1999, from Civil Revision No.4838 of 2003 2 khasra no. 104//2(1-7) being 1/5th share of 1 kanal 7 marlas. It is, therefore, apparent that the decree under execution, does not relate to the land, purchased by the petitioner. In order to place this conclusion in its correct factual perspective, it would be appropriate to reproduce an extract from the order passed by the executing court:- “I have considered this contention of Ld. Counsel for the objector but find no force in it because the decree of possession has already been passed against Jyoti Sarup and appeal filed by him was also dismissed. The execution filed by the decree holder is for possession of land measuring 4 Mls. 6 Sarsahis. Otherwise also the objections by the objector are not maintainable because as per objections filed by her, she has purchased the land measuring 5 Marlas 3 ½ Sarsahis by way of registered sale deed dated 12.01.1999 out of kh. No.104//2(1-7) measuring 14 Mls. The objector has no concern with the suit property regarding which the decree has been passed.” In view of what has been stated hereinabove, as the execution petition does not relate to the petitioners land, the objections were rightly dismissed. The revision petition is disposed of accordingly. It is made clear that this would not debar the petitioner from raising Civil Revision No.4838 of 2003 3 any dispute, if during the execution proceedings her possessory or proprietory rights are jeopardised in any manner. [RAJIVE BHALLA] JUDGE 1st September, 2009 SKaushik