SATPAL SINGH Vs. SURINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order of the executing Court dated February 17, 1989, whereby the objections filed on behalf of the judgment debtor in the execution proceedings were dismissed.

(2.) The plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of the agreement which was decreed by way of a compromise on July 7, 1972. The balance amount of Rs. 35,000/- was to be paid at the time of the execution of the sale deed before the Sub-Registrar which was to be executed on August 20, 1972. In the year 1975, one Sohan Lal filed a suit for injunction against the judgment-debtor and obtained an ad interim injunction restraining him from executing any sale deed. The said suit was dismissed on August 20, 1982. The decree-holder filed execution application on November 12, 1982, in which objections were filed that the decree passed on compromise was not executable as meanwhile there was a fresh agreement dated July 17, 1977, between the parties. The said objection was contested on behalf of the decree holder. It was denied that there was any fresh agreement between the parties after the above-said decree. The trial Court came to the conclusion that the decree dated July 7, 1972, had not become inexecutable as alleged by the judgment-debtor and that there was no fresh agreement to sell between the decree-holder and the judgment-debtor in the year 1977, as alleged in the objections, and consequently, dismissed the objection petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the judgment-debtor-petitioner submitted that it has been wrongly held by the executing Court that there was no fresh agreement between the parties after the decree. According to the learned counsel that finding is against the evidence on the record. He further submitted that according to the terms of the decree, the sale deed was to be executed on August 20, 1972, on payment of the balance amount of Rs. 35,000/-. Since the decree-holder failed to pay the said amount, the sale deed could not be executed and now the decree as such had become inexecutable.