IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.5055 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 13.10.2011 Shabeg Singh ......Petitioner(s) Versus Smt. Gulshan Rani ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Rakesh Bhatia, Advocate for the petitioner. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. The respondent filed an ejectment petition against the petitioner on the ground of non-payment of rent. The tenant failed to tender the assessed rent and consequently, the ejectment petition filed by the respondent was accepted for non-payment of rent and the petitioner was directed to handover the vacant possession of the demised premises to the respondent within three months from the date of order i.e. 21.1.2010. Admittedly, the aforesaid order of ejectment has become final between the parties. The respondent filed an execution application in which the petitioner was proceeded against ex parte and warrant of possession was issued against him. The petitioner filed an application to set aside the said order and also filed objections. The Executing Court passed the following order on 8.8.2011: “To bye pass the judgment and decree dated 21.01.2010 which was to be executed by way of delivery of possession of the demised premises to the DH which has since attained finality, respondent/JD has made a statement in the court that he is ready to pay the outstanding rent amount of Rs.35 lacs approximately but paid only Rs.2,30,000/- since 07.03.2011. Warrants of possession issued for 09.10.2010 received back with the report that there is an apprehension of breach of peace and without police help possession cannot be delivered, DH is directed to examine bailiff and his summons be issued for 17.08.2011.” The grievance of the petitioner before this Court is that he has filed objections before the Executing Court. However, before deciding the aforesaid objections, the Executing Court has further proceeded with the execution proceedings while passing the impugned order dated 8.8.2011. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the impugned order. Admittedly, order of ejectment against the petitioner has become final. Perusal of the objections would show that the same have been raised only to delay the execution of the ejectment order. Not only this, admittedly, the petitioner is in arrears of rent which is more than Rs.30/- lacs. Moreover, the matter is still pending before the Executing Court and vide impugned order, the Executing Court has directed to cross- examine the bailiff for the purpose of ascertaining the fact that there is an apprehension of breach of peace and without police help possession cannot be delivered. Even before this Court, counsel for the petitioner was unable to point out any objection of substance against execution of the decree. Thus, there is no merit in this revision petition. Dismissed. October 13, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE