- (1.) Judgment debtors no. 3,6,7 and 11 have filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning order dated 14.8.2010, Annexure P/5 passed by learned executing court i.e. Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar thereby dismissing objections Annexure P/3 filed by judgment debtors in the execution petition.
(2.) Vide judgment dated 8.11.2001, Annexure P/1 suit filed by respondent Punjab Wakf Board against the petitioners and other defendants was partly decreed for possession of suit land measuring 12 marlas after removing malba therefrom. Respondent decree-holder filed execution petition for executing said decree. Judgment debtors preferred objections Annexure P/3 alleging that exchange has taken place between the parties whereby JDs gave 19 marlas land to DH in lieu of suit land measuring 12 marlas. The said objections have been dismissed by the executing court vide impugned order Annexure P/5 which is under challenge in this revision petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.
(3.) Counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that in view of compromise and exchange between the parties, respondent-DH cannot execute the decree. It was also submitted that earlier execution petitions were got dismissed as withdrawn. The contention does not help the petitioners. Petitioners have relied on alleged agreement dated 19.5.1995, Annexure P/4 regarding the alleged exchange between the parties. However, the said agreement came into existence even prior to filing of the suit in which judgment and decree dated 8.11.2001 sought to be executed, were passed. Consequently, the said agreement cannot be used to obstruct or thwart the execution of the decree. On the other hand, the alleged agreement Annexure P/4 was also set up in the suit and has been discarded vide judgment Annexure P/1. Consequently, on the basis of the same alleged agreement, the JDs cannot resist the decree. There is no plea even in the objections that after passing of judgment and decree dated 8.11.2001, there was any compromise between the parties. Moreover, if there had been any compromise between the parties after passing of the decree to satisfy the same, the same had to be got recorded in the trial court or in the executing court. In any case, there is neither any plea nor any material on record to depict that after passing of decree dated 8.11.2001, there was any compromise between the parties.;