- (1.) PETITIONERS have filed this petition challenging the order dated 2.6.1993 whereby objection petition filed by the petitioners was dismissed.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has submitted that decree dated 11.4.1969 was a conditional one. As per the decree, Jaswant Kaur was to deposit Rs. 5500/ - for payment to Jagdish Parshad before 31.5.1969. However, the said amount was not deposited by Jaswant Kaur within the stipulated period. Therefore, possession could not be handed over to Jaswant Kaur.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, has opposed the petition and has submitted that pleas taken by the petitioners were considered and dealt with by the Executing Court vide order dated 3.6.1989 (Annexure P -3). The said order had gone unchallenged and therefore second objection petition raising same objections by the petitioner, was not maintainable. Jaswant Kaur had filed suit for possession of the vacant site in question. Suit filed by Jaswant Kaur was dismissed by the Trial Court. However, in appeal, this Court decreed the suit. While decreeing the suit, this Court held that Jaswant Kaur will deposit Rs. 5500/ - for payment to Jagdish Parshad before 31.5.1969. In case the same was deposited, Jagdish Parshad would hand over the possession of the land in question to Jaswant Kaur -appellant. In case, possession was not delivered voluntarily by Jagdish Parshad to the appellant by 12.6.1969, then the appellant would be entitled to seek execution of the decree through Court.;