C.R. No.5943 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.5943 of 2010 Date of Decision: 15.9.2010 Chanderwati Saini ……Petitioner VERSUS Manju Rani ……Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH -.- Present: Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) C.R. No.5943 of 2010 -2- 1. Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 9.9.2010 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Ku- rukshetra, whereby learned Executing Court dismissed the objections of the Judgment Debtor not to execute the decree for specific per- formance of the contract. 2. Brief facts of the present case are that plaintiff (respon- dent herein) has filed a suit for specific performance of the contract in terms of the agreement dated 29.11.2005, which was decreed by the learned trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 19.7.2008. De- fendant (petitioner herein) filed first appeal, which was decided by learned Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra vide judgment and de- cree dated 29.1.2010, thereby directing the defendant/petitioner to pay amount of Rs.1,00,000/- alongwith 9% interest per annum from the date of agreement to sell dated 29.11.2005, within a period of two months from the date of passing of the judgment dated 29.1.2010 to the plaintiff/respondent. It is also made clear that in case defendant/petitioner fails to refund the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- alongwith interest as directed by the learned Appellate Court, decree for specific performance dated 19.7.2008 shall be executed against the defendant/petitioner. 3. Mr. Pritam Saini, learned Counsel for the petitioner states that amount of Rs.1,39,000/- has already been deposited before the executing Court on 25.3.2010 i.e. within two months from the date of judgment passed by the learned Appellate Court on 29.1.2010 vide C.R. No.5943 of 2010 -3- Annexure Nos.6 and 7 to this petition. He further states that despite of deposit of entire amount alongwith interest as directed by the learned Appellate Court, learned Executing Court without noticing this important fact has directed to execute the decree for specific per- formance against the defendant/petitioner. 4. Without going into the merit of the case, I direct that the Executing Court shall decide the question afresh, as to whether de- fendant/petitioner has deposited entire decretal amount alongwith in- terest as directed by the learned first Appellate Court within a pre- scribed period, as alleged by learned Counsel for the petitioner be- fore this Court. If Executing Court comes to the conclusion that en- tire amount has been deposited by the defendant/petitioner within a prescribed period, then Executing Court shall pass appropriate order dismissing the execution for specific performance of the contract. However, if Executing Court finds that the amount has not been de- posited as per the direction of the learned first Appellate Court, then decree for specific performance shall be executed forthwith in compli- ance of the judgment passed by the learned first Appellate Court dated 29.1.2010. In view of the above, impugned order dated 9.9.2010 is quashed. 5. Petitioner shall appear before the Executing Court on 21.9.2010. C.R. No.5943 of 2010 -4- 6. Petition is disposed of accordingly. ( ALOK SINGH ) 15th September, 2010 JUDGE ashish