VINOD K.SHARMA,J. - (1.) THE petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge the order dated 21.9.2007 attached as Annexure P.7 passed by the learned Executing Court, Kurukshetra dismissing the execution application moved by the petitioner.
(2.) THE petitioner filed a suit for declaration to the effect that the agreement to sell dated 3.4.1984 and 21.4.1984 alleged to be executed by the plaintiff in favour of defendant No. 1 for the sale of suit land measuring 53 kanals 12 marlas was illegal, null and void, inoperative, ineffective, ultra vires and executed by misrepresentation of the facts and fraud. The agreement to sell was said to be inexecutable, fake, fabricated, without consideration and not binding on the rights of the plaintiff. The suit was compromised and decreed in terms of compromise Ex.D.1 entered into between the parties. The compromise entered into between the parties reads as under : " Fakiria son of Chhaju Ram, resident of village Devidas Pura, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra (plaintiff 1st Party) AND Jasmer Singh son of Singh Ram, resident of 816, Housing Board Colony, Kurukshetra (Defendant 2nd Party). Today on 12.11.1987 both the parties have reached a compromise before a Panchayat regarding agreement to sell dated 3.4.1984 and agreement dated 21.4.1984. The compromise has been made by the party in such a way that the agreement to sell dated 3.4.1984 and 21.4.1984 stand cancelled but the 1st party Fakiria son of Chhaju Ram, resident of village Devidas Pura would execute a sale deed and get it registered for a land measuring 8 kanals in Khasra No. 51/20 in favour of Jasmer Singh defendant and Jasmer Singh would pay Rs. 10,000/- in cash at the time of the said registration of sale deed to Fakiria son of Chhaju Ram. Hence, both the parties have accepted the compromise with their good mind and this compromise was written as a proof. Suit may be decreed accordingly. Written on 12.11.1987."
(3.) THE petitioner moved an application for execution of the said decree in which judgment debtor Fakiria filed objections claiming that the decree was inexecutable as no decree for specific performance was passed in favour of the petitioner. Objections filed by the judgment debtors were dismissed by the executing court by way of order dated 11.3.2004.;