NIRMALA DEVI Vs. MAHARAJ MAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by Smt. Nirmala Devi, one of the judgment debtors, against the order dated 13.1.2005 passed by the learned executing Court whereby the application filed by her for permission to file suplementary objections was dismissed by the executing Court.

(2.) The facts which are relevant for the decision of the present revision petition are that Maharaj Mal, decree holder, had filed execution petition before the executing Court for the execution of the decree dated 2.5.1990 passed by this Court in R.S.A. No. 7 of 1979 whereby the decree holder was granted a decree for possession of the suit property measuring 14 kanal 15 marlas. Previously, the decree holder had filed an execution petition for possession of 14 kanal 5 marla of land for which a warrant of possession was issued and in pursuance thereof possession in respect of 14 kanal 5 marla of land was given to the decree holder. Subsequently the decree holder filed execution petition in respect of 10 marla of land as the same still remained to be executed. Smt. Nirmala Devi, one of the judgment debtors, had filed objections against the said execution petition, but the same were dismissed by the learned executing Court on 13.9.2004 holding that there was no bar in allowing the decree holder to obtain actual possession of the remaining 10 marla of land. The said order dated 13.9.2004 passed by the executing Court was upheld by this Court in the Civil Revision, while dismissing the revision petition filed by Smt. Nirmala Devi, judgment debtor. Subsequently, Smt. Nirmala Devi, judgment debtor, filed an application, referred to above, seeking permission to file supplementary objections. This application was contested by the decree holder. After hearing both sides and perusing the record the learned executing Court dismissed the aforesaid application filed by Smt. Nirmala Devi, judgment debtor, holding that this Court had passed decree for 14 kanal 15 marl as of land in favour of the decree holder and the executing Court is bound to deliver the possession of the same to the decree holder. Aggrieved against dismissal of the said application filed by the judgment debtor, Smt. Nirmala Devi has filed the present revision petition in this Court.

(3.) After hearing learned Counsel and perusing the record in my opinion there is no merit in this revision petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.