YATINDER RANA Vs. HARPAL SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is the decree -holder (DH) and has invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to set aside the order dated 10.10.2011 (Annexure P -6) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Karnal, in execution petition Annexure P -4 mainly holding that the balance sale price was not deposited within the time and refusing to grant the extension resulting into dismissal of the execution.

(2.) THE petitioner filed a civil suit No. 75 on 14.06.2003 for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell dated 15.05.2001 executed by respondent No. 1 -judgment debtor (JD) in respect of land measuring 1 kanal 14 marlas being 1/5th share out of total land measuring 8 kanals 10 marlas. The suit was decreed by the trial Court with costs vide judgment dated 06.01.2007 (Annexure P -1), directing respondent No. 1 -JD to execute and register the sale deed in favour of petitioner -DH after receiving the balance sale consideration of Rs. 4,50,000/ - from the petitioner as per terms and conditions of the agreement to sell and hand over vacant possession of the property. It was made clear in the decree that if respondent No. 1 -JD failed to execute the sale deed in favour of petitioner within three months, the petitioner was entitled to get the sale deed executed through the Court. Respondent No. 1 -JD preferred appeal against the judgment and decree of the lower Court bearing Civil Appeal No. 20 of 2007 instituted on 06.02.2007 but the same was dismissed on 27.02.2009 (Annexure P -3). Appeal against the judgment of the lower Court was also dismissed with costs.

(3.) DURING pendency of execution petition, the petitioner -DH moved an application dated 31.07.2010 (Annexure P -5) before the Executing Court seeking permission to deposit the balance sale consideration after deducting the amount of costs of the suit. It was reiterated in this application that the petitioner was ready to deposit the same in the Government Treasury and two challans duly filled for deposit of the amount were enclosed with the application. The application was declined by the trial/executing Court vide impugned order dated 10.10.2011 (Annexure P -6) by observing as under: - -