(1.) The instant petition stands directed against the impugned order, recorded by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Una, District Una, H.P. upon the objections constituted there before by the JD, whereupon he resisted the execution of the conclusively recorded decree of mandatory injunction whereupon the projections raised by the JD upon khasra No. 4464/2903/1, projections whereof stands denoted by letters shown in red and yellow circles in the site plan stood hence ordered to be demolished, whereupon he hence dismissed the apposite objections reared there before. Initially, the judgment debtor resisted the execution, by the learned executing Court, of the apposite decree put to execution there before by his rearing objections there before, objections, whereof, however thereat did not hold there within any unfoldment qua the judgment debtor suo motu voluntarily begetting compliance with the decree of mandatory injunction aforesaid, comprised in his removing the unauthorisedly raised projection/construction upon khasra No. 4464/2903/1. However, the aforesaid compliance made by the JD with the decree put to execution before the learned executing Court, stood subsequently espoused by him, espousal whereof stood embedded in an application constituted there before under the provisions of Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, whereon also the learned executing Court pronounced an order dismissing it. The order rendered by the learned Executing Court upon the application constituted there before by the JD under the provisions of Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, stood pronounced thereon, on 1.5.2012, whereas the learned Executing Court proceeded to subsequently on 18.8.2012 dismiss the objections constituted there before by the judgment debtor.
(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner herein, has hereat constituted an onslaught qua the legality of the orders pronounced by the learned Executing Court upon the application constituted there before by the judgment debtor under the provisions of Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, however, he in prompt sequel to the orders standing pronounced thereupon, by the learned Executing Court, visibly omitted to make an apposite motion here before for hence seeking their reversal. Obviously, he waited for the pronouncement of a verdict by the learned Executing Court, upon his earlier therewith instituted objections qua the executability of the execution petition, objections whereof did not hold there within any averment qua the judgment debtor suo moto meteing compliance with the mandate of the conclusively recorded concurrent decree(s) of mandatory injunction, pronounced upon him, by the civil courts concerned, whereupon the failure or omission of the judgment debtor, to promptly, on rendition of an apposite verdict upon his application constituted under the provisions of Order 6 Rule 17 CPC before the learned Executing Court, hence may estop him to assail it here before nor he nowat stand vested with any leverage, to while assailing the orders recorded subsequent thereto upon his objections by the learned Executing Court, to also assail the verdict recorded, by it, upon his application constituted there before under the provisions of order 6 Rule 17 CPC. Though, an apposite facilitation or statutory leverage stands bestowed upon a party to the lis, aggrieved, by any pronouncement made by the learned trial Court or the learned first Appellate Court upon any motion constituted there before during the pendency of a civil suit before it or during the pendency of an appeal before the learned First Appellate Court, to dehors his not making a prompt challenge thereto here before, to within the grounds of appeal held in a Regular Second Appeal constituted here before against the verdicts recorded by the courts below to also assail the pronouncements respectively recorded by the learned trial Court and by the learned first Appellate Court upon application(s) respectively constituted there before during the pendency of the apposite civil suit or during the pendency of an appeal thereat, ensual whereof, of the aforesaid statutory leverage(s) vis-a-vis the aggrieved litigant, significantly accrues from the mandate held in the provisions of Section 105 of the Code of Civil Procedure, provisions whereof stand extracted hereinafter.
(3.) The bestowing of the aforesaid statutory leverage upon an aggrieved from an adverse pronouncement recorded upon him qua application(s) instituted before the civil Court concerned or upon applications constituted before the appellate Court, hence visibly ensue qua him on his preferring a second appeal before this Court, whereas with the petitioner herein, invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this Court, thereupon he may stand estopped to assail the decision recorded by the learned executing Court upon his application constituted there before under the provisions of Order 6 Rule 17 CPC. However, the baulking of the aforesaid endeavour of the revisionist, would be unjust besides would be for the reason(s) ascribed hereinafter hence judicially inexpedient.