SUJJAN KAUR Vs. BUDH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Judgment Debtor is in the revision petition against the order passed by the learned Executing Court dismissing objection petition filed by the Judgment Debtor against the warrants of possession.

(2.) Decree holder filed a suit for possession of a house comprising of 8 rooms, store, verandah, open space, kitchen, bathroom constructed on a plot measuring 1 kanals and 5 marlas. Of course, reference was also given to Khasra No.270. However, the property was also identified by the details of the properties located on all four directions. In the suit, there was no dispute with regard to identification of the property and the defendant claimed that he has become owner by way of adverse possession. The civil suit was decreed vide judgment and decree dtd. 25/11/2011, which has been affirmed in the first appeal as also in the second appeal. When the execution petition was filed, initially the learned Executing Court passed an order for carrying out digital demarcation of the property. However, warrants of possession were received back with the report that digital demarcation is not possible on the spot because it is entirely constructed area. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the learned court issued warrants of possession in accordance with the decree.

(3.) Learned counsel for the judgment debtor has vehemently contended that once digital demarcation was ordered, the Executing Court could not recall the same. He further submitted that there is a reference in the suit to land comprised in khasra no.270 and therefore, the decree for possession could not be executed on the basis of the properties in dispute located on all four directions. This court has considered the submissions, however, find no substance therein.