Viney Mittal, J. - (1.) On a request made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, at the out set, the present petition is treated to be a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) The decree holders are the petitioners before this court. A decree dated February 26,1991 was passed by the learned trial court qua possession of the suit land. The execution of the aforesaid decree was sought by the decree holders. The defendant-judgment debtors (State of Haryana and District Forest Officer) claimed that they were entitled to cut and remove the trees standing on the land in question. The executing Court vide order dated August 13,1996 had accepted the plea of the judgment debtors and has held that the judgment debtors can remove the trees from the suit land. It had also been found by the executing court that the trees in question were sown by the defendant-judgment debtors.
(3.) Shri Adarsh Jain,learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffdecree holders has referred to para 6 of the judgment dated February 26,1991. My pointed attention has been drawn to the following portion of the judgment: "As per report of field Kanungo Ex.PW3/A possession of Forest department was fund over kila No.124/2/8 and kila No.124/9/1.Local Commissioner himself has examined in the court as PW-3 Harish Chand and proved his report Ex.PW3/. From the entire documentary evidence and report of local commissioner Ex.PW3/A it has been proved that plaintiffs are owners in possession over land in dispute whereas some portion of kila No.124/2 and eastern portion of kila No.124/B and entire khasra No.124/9/1 has been encroached upon by defendants No.2 and plaintiffs are entitled to take possession over the suit land along with the trees standing on the portion encroached upon by the defendant.";