IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 4603 of 2011 Date of decision: 1.8.2011 Jagbir Singh and others … Petitioners versus Gian Singh and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present: Mr. Ashok Kaushik, Advocate, for the petitioners ... ARVIND KUMAR, J: The present petitioners are the decree-holders. Their suit was decreed on 11.10.2001. They filed an execution petition. Judgment- debtors filed objections for which reply was also filed. The execution petition was dismissed in default on 1.5.2008. The present petitioners filed an application for restoration but the application too has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 30.8.2010 passed by the Civil Judge(Junior Division), Palwal. Hence, this revision. Heard. The only argument that has been addressed by the petitioner-decree-holders is that when the case was adjourned to 1.5.2008, they had noted the date as 5.1.2009 and when on that date, they went to the Court, they found that the execution petition had been dismissed in default. It has been argued that an irreparable loss would be caused to the petitioner- decree-holders if the execution petition is not restored. Rules and procedure are hand-maid of justice and are meant for enhancing the same and not to scuttle it. Keeping in view the fact that the dispute between the parties is required to be disposed of on merits and not on the basis of technicalities, this revision petition is allowed, the order under challenge is set aside and the execution petition stands restored to its original number for being decided on merits; however, subject C.R. No. 4603 of 2011 -2- to payment of costs of Rs.5000/- to be paid to the respondents. Keeping in view the circumstances mentioned above, this revision is being disposed of without issuing any notice to the opposite party. If the respondents are summoned to contest this litigation, they will have to incur huge expenses to defend this case. However, liberty is granted to the respondents that if they feel dissatisfied with this order, they may move an application to recall the same. August 1, 2011 ( ARVIND KUMAR ) JS JUDGE