PARDEEP KUMAR Vs. SAVITA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant Civil Revision Petition has been preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside of the order dtd. 30/5/2022 (Annexure P5) passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.), Bhiwani.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that the suit property has not been properly identified in the decree, therefore, the ex parte decree dtd. 12/7/2017 passed by the trial Court cannot be executed.

(3.) Learned counsel submits that a perusal of the registered Sale Deed No.4110 dtd. 13/7/2012 (Annexure P3) reveals that the property has been described as "Gher" and not a house. Thus the decree qua the house of the petitioner is null and void, being contrary to the evidence on record. He submits that the Executing Court erred in dismissing the objections as the judgment and decree dtd. 12/7/2017 was passed behind his back and even though an application moved by him under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC was pending adjudication. Hence, until its decision the ex parte decree dtd. 12/7/2017 could not be executed.