Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Tej Ram vs Balbir Singh And Others on 17 January, 2011

Author: Mohinder Pal

Bench: Mohinder Pal

                                   -1-

            Civil Revision No.233 of          2011 (O&M).




 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH
                           ...


                  Date of Decision: January 17, 2011.


                  Civil Revision No.233 of      2011 (O&M).


Tej Ram                                               ... Petitioner


                         VERSUS


Balbir Singh and others                               ... Respondents




CORAM :    HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL.


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 ?



Present:   Mr. S.S. Dinarpur, Advocate,
           for the petitioner.

                  -.-


MOHINDER PAL, J.

In this revision petition, the Judgment Debtor (petitioner-defendant) has challenged various orders passed by the executing Court to execute the decree dated 22.2.1996 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jagadhri, in favour of the Decree Holders (respondents-plaintiffs). -2-

Civil Revision No.233 of 2011 (O&M).

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the impugned order, I do not see any ground which may warrant interference by this Court in the impugned orders passed by the executing Court. As admitted by the petitioner- defendant himself in para No.3 of the petition, the judgment and decree dated 22.2.1996 had attained finality as the appeal filed thereagainst had been dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Jagadhri, vide judgment and decree dated 10.9.1998. As the Decree Holder has been delivered possession by now, the execution application has been dismissed as fully satisfied and consigned to the record room, as is evident from the order dated 4.9.2010 (Annexure P-7) passed by the executing Court. This revision is, accordingly, hereby dismissed being without any merit.

( MOHINDER PAL ) January 17, 2011. JUDGE ak