Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Prem Prakash Chaudhary, learned counsel for the objector-appellant and Sri Abu Bakht, learned counsel for the decree holder/respondent No.1.
(2.) One Sri Mahendra Singh was the father of the objector-appellant. He sold the disputed house in the year 1995 to his son Harminder Singh, who subsequently executed an agreement to sell in favour of the decree holder/respondent No.1.
(3.) Since sale deed was not being executed by the aforesaid Harminder Singh, therefore, the decree holder/respondent No.1 filed O.S. No.505 of 2006 for specific performance which was decreed by the trial court by judgment and decree dated 19.07.2013. Thereafter the decree holder filed an Execution Case No.8 of 2013. The sale deed was executed through Court on 16.02.2016 in favour of the decree holder/respondent No.1. An order of possession was passed in favour of the decree holder in Misc. Case No.50 of 2017 in which the objector-appellant filed an objection being paper No.3-Ga on the ground that the disputed house is an ancestral property in which she has 1/4th share and therefore, the entire house could not have been sold by his brother-Harminder Singh. The aforesaid application 3-Ga was rejected by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No.1, Muzaffarnagar by order dated 12.09.2018 on the finding that the objector-appellant has not filed any evidence to indicate that the disputed house was owned by her great grand father.;