STATE OF HARYANA Vs. LAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed against order dated 15.4.1994, vide which, objections filed by the petitioner, to the execution application, were dismissed. It is apparent from the records that the respondents filed a suit for possession, claiming ownership of the property, in dispute. It was their case that they were owners and lessees of the property, in dispute, possession of which has forcibly been taken by the petitioner. Their suit was dismissed. However, they succeeded in appeal. Petitioner filed Regular Second Appeal in this Court, which was dismissed on 8.1.1991. THIS Court, while disposing of that RSA, has observed thus:-

(2.) JUDGMENT, referred to above, has become final. A specific finding has been given by this Court that the school did not exist over the property, in dispute and further that the respondents were owners of the property, in dispute. When execution was filed, again an objection was raised by the petitioner that the respondents were not owners of the property, which was rightly discarded by the executing Court. Before this Court also, an attempt has been made to place reliance upon certain documents, which could have been produced at the time when trial was going on, to say that the respondents were not owners of the property, in dispute. This Court feels that neither the executing Court nor this Court, at this stage, can start a fresh trial regarding ownership of the property, in dispute, regarding which, orders passed have already become final. It is an established law that the executing Court has no jurisdiction to go beyond the decree. No case is made out for interference in the order passed. Dismissed. However, it is left open to the State Government, to acquire the property, in dispute, as per law, if need be.